THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS∶MAKING SENSE OF TREATIES AND CONGRESSIONAL EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Treaties and congressional executive agreements are two methods by which the United States enters into binding international agreements. Each instrument has been used since the earliest days of the Constitution, but there is confusion concerning the substantive appropriateness of each form. This confusion is compounded by the fact that the text of the U.S. Constitution is silent regarding the substantive differences between the two instruments. Another consideration is the fact that there is debate concerning a modern movement advocating the interchangeability of congressional executive agreements for treaties. Despite the confusion, textual silence, and scholarly debate, the historical record indicates a consistency in use. This article shows that the choice of instrument (treaty or congressional executive agreement) is fairly predictable based on the subject matter or topic of the proposed agreement. This predictability results from consistent historical practice and modern preferences. In examining each form, this article reviews the relevant procedures and history behind each instrument. Because there is no clear rule concerning the proper subject matter for each method, this article also looks at the particular patterns of usage and explore the defining moments that have shaped the modern usage of each form. By understanding the various facets of treaties and congressional executive agreements is an essential element in making sense of the various instruments used by the United States to make international agreements.
Abstract
Treaties and congressional executive agreements are two methods by which the United States enters into binding international agreements. Each instrument has been used since the earliest days of the Constitution, but there is confusion concerning the substantive appropriateness of each form. This confusion is compounded by the fact that the text of the U.S. Constitution is silent regarding the substantive differences between the two instruments. Another consideration is the fact that there is debate concerning a modern movement advocating the interchangeability of congressional executive agreements for treaties. Despite the confusion, textual silence, and scholarly debate, the historical record indicates a consistency in use. This article shows that the choice of instrument (treaty or congressional executive agreement) is fairly predictable based on the subject matter or topic of the proposed agreement. This predictability results from consistent historical practice and modern preferences. In examining each form, this article reviews the relevant procedures and history behind each instrument. Because there is no clear rule concerning the proper subject matter for each method, this article also looks at the particular patterns of usage and explore the defining moments that have shaped the modern usage of each form. By understanding the various facets of treaties and congressional executive agreements is an essential element in making sense of the various instruments used by the United States to make international agreements.
참고문헌 (20)
- Ackerman, Bruce, "Is NAFTA Constitutional?", Harvard Law Review, 108(4) (1995)
- Clark, Bradford R, "Domesticating Sole Executive Agreements", Virginia Law Review, 93(7) (2007)
- Corwin, Edward S, "The Constitution and World Organization" (1944), Princeton University Press
- Dalton, Robert E, "National Treaty Law and Practice: United States, In National Treaty Law and Practice" (2005), Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
- Garner, James W., "Acts and Joint Resolutions of Congress as Substitutes for Treaties", AmericanJournal of International Law, (29) (1935)
- Hathaway, Oona, "Treaties' End: The Past, Present, and Future of International Lawmaking inthe United States", Yale Law Journal, 117(7) (2008)
- Hayden, Ralston, "The Senate and Treaties 1789‐1817" (1920)
- Henkin, Louis, "U.S. Ratification of Human Rights Conventions: The Ghost of Senator Bricker", American Journal of International Law, 89(2) (1995)
- Henkin, Louis, "Foreign Affairs and the US Constitution" (1996), Oxford University Press
- Koh, Harold, "The Fast Track and United States Trade Policy", Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 18(1) (1992)
- McDougal, Myers S, "Treaties and Congressional‐Executive or Presidential Agreements: Interchangeable Instruments of National Policy", Yale Law Journal, 54(2) (1945)
- Rakove, Jack N, "Solving a Constitutional Puzzle: The Treatymaking Clause as a Case Study", Perspectives in American History, 1 (1984)
- Ramsey, Michael D., "Executive Agreements and the (Non)Treaty Power", North Carolina Law Review, 77(1) (1999)
- "The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787" (1934), Yale University Press
- Spiro, Peter J., "Treaties, Executive Agreements, and Constitutional Method", Texas law Review, 79(5) (2001)
- Tribe, Laurence H, "Taking Text and Structure Seriously: Reflections on Free-Form Method in Constitutional Interpretation", Harvard Law Review, 108(6) (1995)
- Tribe, Lawrence H, "American Constitutional Law" (2000), Foundation Press
- Trimble, Phillip R., "International Law: United States Foreign Relations Law" (2002), Foundation Press
- Wright, Quincy, "The United States and International Agreements", American Journal of International Law, 38(3) (1944)
- Yoo, John C, "Laws as Treaties?: The Constitutionality of Congressional‐Executive Agreements", Michigan Law Review, 99(4) (2001)