3 ms·

you are using a rhetorical sleight of hand when you say that (paraphrasal) "with strong Senate support the President can bypass the House, but otherwise a treat

you are using a rhetorical sleight of hand when you say that (paraphrasal) "with strong Senate support the President can bypass the House, but otherwise a treaty can be considered normal simple majority legislation." That's not the way the Constitution is written, and treaties are not normal legislation. I'm not saying that "you're wrong", I'm convinced that it's being done, but imho SCOTUS should overturn this style of treaty.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> I'm not saying that "you're wrong", I'm convinced that it's being done, but imho SCOTUS should overturn this style of treaty. SCOTUS should overturn the Congress exercising using the legislative process to do things expressly within its legislative powers on...what basis? OTOH, congressional-executive agreements aren't new, and have been litigated quite a bit. Heck, SCOTUS has even held a particular one to be included in the delegation by Congress of jurisdiction over treaty interpretation cases to the Courts of Appeal over a century ago. B. Altman & Co. v. United States, 224 U.S. 583 (1912).