Who Has The Power To Ratify Treaties?

Treaties are binding agreements between nations and become part of international law. In the US, the President has the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur. The Senate does not ratify treaties but can approve or reject a resolution of ratification. Treaties to which the US is a party have the force of federal legislation, forming part of what the Constitution calls the supreme Law of the Land. The US Constitution distinguishes between treaties and agreements. Treaties are made by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, while agreements not submitted to the Senate are known as executive agreements.

The US President has the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate

The US Constitution grants the President the power to make treaties, but only with the advice and consent of the Senate. This is outlined in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution, which states that the President "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur". This clause, known as the Treaty Clause, establishes the procedure for ratifying international agreements and gives the President the role of primary negotiator.

The Treaty Clause was influenced by the perceived flaws of the Articles of Confederation, which was the first governmental framework of the United States. The Articles established a weak central government and gave significant autonomy to individual states. The unicameral Congress had both legislative and executive functions, including the power to make treaties. However, for a treaty to take effect, it needed the approval of a supermajority of states, which prevented many foreign pacts from being made.

During the Constitutional Convention in 1787, there was debate over whether the Senate or the President should have the power to make treaties. Initially, it was contemplated that the Senate would have this power, but just ten days before the Convention adjourned, it was decided that the President and the Senate would share this power. This compromise gave the President the authority to negotiate international agreements, while still allowing the Senate to provide advice and consent, with a two-thirds supermajority required for a treaty to become binding.

While the President has the power to negotiate and sign treaties, the Senate also plays a role in the treaty-making process. Once a treaty is negotiated and signed, the President submits it to the Senate for approval. The Senate can then choose to approve or disapprove of the treaty, with the latter option including the power to attach conditions or reservations. If the Senate approves the treaty, the process returns to the Executive Branch, where the President makes the final decision on whether to enter into the treaty on behalf of the United States.

In recent decades, there have been instances of presidents entering into international agreements without the advice and consent of the Senate, known as "executive agreements". While these agreements are binding under international law, they do not have the force of federal legislation like treaties ratified by the Senate.

Treaties are binding agreements between nations and become part of international law

The President has the power to make treaties, but they must be approved by a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate to become binding with the force of federal law. This means that the President cannot make treaties without the consent of the Senate, and the Senate cannot make treaties without the President's involvement. The Senate does not ratify treaties; instead, it approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, ratification occurs when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the US and the foreign power(s).

Treaties are equivalent in status to federal legislation in the US. They are considered the "supreme law of the land", with the same efficacy as legislative acts. Treaties can be self-executing, which means they don't require additional legislative action to take effect, or non-self-executing, which means they must be implemented by an act of the legislature.

In addition to treaties, there are also executive agreements, which are agreements made by the President without the advice and consent of the Senate. These are still binding under international law, but they are legally distinct under US law. Executive agreements are typically used for one-shot agreements, such as prisoner exchanges or claim settlements, or when they are based on the President's independent authority, such as recognizing foreign nations.

Treaties are equivalent in status to federal legislation

Treaties are legally binding agreements between nations and are part of international law. In the United States, the process of treaty-making is outlined in the Treaty Clause of the United States Constitution (Article II, Section 2). This clause empowers the President as the primary negotiator of agreements with other countries, and the President is required to obtain the advice and consent of a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate for a treaty to be binding with the force of federal law. The Senate does not ratify treaties; instead, it approves or rejects a resolution of ratification after consideration by the Committee on Foreign Relations.

The United States Constitution considers treaties to be part of "the supreme Law of the Land", giving them the same status as federal legislation. This means that treaties are subject to judicial interpretation and review, and courts must regard them as equivalent to acts of the legislature. The Supreme Court has consistently recognised the legally binding nature of treaties, as seen in the early case of Ware v. Hylton in 1796, where the Court applied the Supremacy Clause to rule that a treaty took precedence over conflicting state law.

The domestic status of treaties in the United States is outlined in Article VI of the Constitution, which states that treaties have the same force as Federal statutes. This means that in the event of a conflict between a treaty and a Federal statute, the latter takes precedence, and the courts will endeavour to harmonise the respective international and domestic obligations. This principle was affirmed in the case of Whitney v. Robertson, where the Supreme Court stated that treaties and acts of legislation are both declared by the Constitution to be the supreme law of the land, with no superiority given to either.

The effectiveness of a treaty as domestic law in the United States depends on whether it is "self-executing", meaning it operates without the need for additional implementing legislation. In the case of Foster v. Neilson, Chief Justice Marshall emphasised that a treaty is to be regarded as the law of the land and is thus equivalent to an act of the legislature when it operates independently. However, it's important to note that a Federal statute that conflicts with a treaty's terms can deprive that treaty of its force as law within the country.

In conclusion, treaties are indeed equivalent in status to federal legislation in the United States. They are legally binding, subject to judicial review, and given the same constitutional weight as acts of the legislature. The process of treaty-making and ratification ensures that treaties are negotiated by the President and approved by a supermajority in the Senate, demonstrating their significance and impact on both international and domestic law.

Treaties are ratified when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between nations

The process of ratifying a treaty can vary depending on the country and the specific treaty being considered. However, there are typically several key steps that are followed. First, the executive branch of the government—usually the President or Secretary of State—will authorise the negotiation of a treaty. Next, representatives of the countries involved will negotiate the terms of the treaty. Once the terms have been agreed upon, the treaty is signed by the representatives. The treaty is then submitted to the respective legislative bodies for approval, which in the US is the Senate. If the treaty is approved by the legislative bodies, it is then formally ratified through the exchange of instruments of ratification between the nations involved.

It is important to note that not all international agreements are considered treaties. In the US, for example, agreements that are not submitted to the Senate for approval are known as "executive agreements". While these agreements are still considered binding under international law, they do not carry the same weight as treaties, which are equivalent in status to federal legislation.

The ratification process for a treaty can be a lengthy and complex one, and it is not uncommon for treaties to be negotiated and signed by countries but never ratified due to a lack of approval from the legislative bodies involved. Additionally, it is worth noting that the President of the United States has the power to terminate a treaty without Senate approval if the treaty allows for such termination. This was demonstrated in 2002 when President George W. Bush unilaterally withdrew the United States from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Treaties can be self-executing or non-self-executing

Treaties are binding agreements between nations and become part of international law. Treaties can be self-executing or non-self-executing.

Self-executing treaties are a type of international agreement that becomes enforceable as domestic law immediately upon ratification. They do not require any additional legislation or implementation by the national legislature. The Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution states that treaties concluded in accordance with constitutional requirements have the status of the "supreme Law of the Land".

On the other hand, non-self-executing treaties require implementation through legislation before they become judicially enforceable. They are not directly enforceable in US courts, and Congress must generally pass legislation implementing the provision in a domestic statute to make it judicially enforceable.

The distinction between self-executing and non-self-executing treaties first emerged in the early 19th century in the United States, where it has thoroughly confused the courts. Since then, the distinction has been adopted by the courts of other countries.

The determination of whether a treaty is self-executing or non-self-executing is not always straightforward. In some cases, a treaty may specify whether it is intended to be given immediate domestic legal effect without further action. However, the US Supreme Court has rejected the notion that certain special words or phrases are necessary to make a treaty self-executing.

The process of treaty-making in the US involves the President and the Senate. The President is the primary negotiator of agreements between the US and other countries, and the advice and consent of a two-thirds supermajority of the Senate renders a treaty binding with the force of federal law.

Frequently asked questions