4 ms·
Yes it is. Even for agreements, not treaties, with foreign powers, the states need Congress' approval. I think it is merely symbolic, as California can accompl
by PunchTornado 9y ago
Yes it is. Even for agreements, not treaties, with foreign powers, the states need Congress' approval.
I think it is merely symbolic, as California can accomplish its climate targets voluntarily without any agreements.
This meeting was just to give the finger to the Trump administration and show them that the power is local.
- mondoshawan 9y agoMaybe? Still more than just symbolic, though. An agreement was actually signed by the governor of California with a foreign power. He didn't just do it as a symbol -- it was actually an agreement to adjust trade, and who knows what else behind closed doors.
- autokad 9y agodoes it give a finger to the trump administration? to me it means we can accomplish things without a symbolic accords that will cost the US 3 billion.
- 24gttghh 9y agoSo we're pulling out because of 3 Billion dollars? That's nothing on the global scale.
- PunchTornado 9y ago2 billion. Obama already paid 1bn.
- cryptonector 9y agoConsidering the expansive, still in force, New Deal era interpretation of the Commerce Clause, the U.S. could challenge California's actions in federal court and possibly win. Who knows. Maybe we can get a better interpretation of the Commerce Clause out of it!