Remarks by Michael J. Glennon

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 123-124
Author(s):  
Michael J. Glennon
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs

I am going to say a few brief words this afternoon about one of the great myths in American constitutional law. That is the myth that the federal government has exclusive power over foreign affairs, the myth that the United States is always required to speak internationally with one voice. That myth is flat wrong. It is belied by the constitutional text, by subsequent practice, and by the functional purposes of federalism. Consider each in turn.

Treaties and Executive Agreements

1946 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 729-739
Author(s):  
Edwin M. Bouchard
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Small States ◽  
Democratic Government ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
International Commitments ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Executive Agreements

There have been several recent attempts to change the Constitution by dispensing with the necessity for the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate in the making of treaties. The two-thirds rule is undoubtedly a handicap to the freedom of the Executive in concluding arrangements with foreign countries. It was intended to have such effect; but the check proves to be irksome. It is the author's belief that the check is exceedingly valuable to a democratic government, and while it unquestionably slows up the process of making international commitments, it insures a popular control over treaties and it safeguards the small states in a manner which an easier method of approval might escape.The first method of eliminating the Senate was suggested in 1941 when Mr. Wallace McClure, of the Department of State, wrote his book advocating the interchangeability of the treaty and executive agreement, concluding that anything that could be done by treaty could also be done by executive agreement, with the approval of Congress if necessary, without the approval of Congress if possible. In his support, he invoked what purported to be a growing usage to this effect, as proof of which he cited numerous agreements. These statistics have doubtless been aided by the supposedly unlimited power over foreign affairs assigned to the federal government by Justice Sutherland in the Curtiss-Wright case, a case which has been much misunderstood and the dictum of which has been vigorously criticized. I ventured to review Mr. McClure's book, and came to the conclusion that the dilapidation of the Constitution which he foreshadowed was unjustified by the facts and harmful to the United States. While Mr. McClure's views met a somewhat mixed reception in the Department of State, there is some evidence that his proposals appealed to certain groups.

“The Greatest Nation on Earth”

2017 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah K.M. Rodriguez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Manifest Destiny ◽  
The United States ◽  
Northern Mexico ◽  
Texas Revolution

Between 1820 and 1827 approximately 1,800 U.S. citizens immigrated to northern Mexico as part of that country’s empresario program, in which the federal government granted foreigners land if they promised to develop and secure the region. Historians have long argued that these settlers, traditionally seen as the vanguard of Manifest Destiny, were attracted to Mexico for its cheap land and rich natural resources. Such interpretations have lent a tone of inevitability to events like the Texas Revolution. This article argues that the early members of these groups were attracted to Mexico for chiefly political reasons. At a time when the United States appeared to be turning away from its commitment to a weak federal government, Mexico was establishing itself on a constitution that insured local sovereignty and autonomy. Thus, the Texas Revolution was far from the result of two irreconcilable peoples and cultures. Moreover, the role that these settlers played in the United States’ acquisition of not just Texas, but ultimately half of Mexico’s national territory, was more paradoxical than inevitable.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT FRENCH FOREIGN POLICY ACTIVITY

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-79
Author(s):  
Nargiza Sodikova ◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
Modern Time ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Interests ◽  
French Foreign Policy

Important aspects of French foreign policy and national interests in the modern time,France's position in international security and the specifics of foreign affairs with the United States and the European Union are revealed in this article

James Bryce and the Australian Constitution

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-200
Author(s):  
Stephen Gageler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Constitutional Development ◽  
Practical Operation ◽  
Responsible Government ◽  
Shed Light

James Bryce was a contemporary of Albert Venn Dicey. Bryce published in 1888 The American Commonwealth. Its detailed description of the practical operation of the United States Constitution was influential in the framing of the Australian Constitution in the 1890s. The project of this article is to shed light on that influence. The article compares and contrasts the views of Bryce and of Dicey; Bryce's views, unlike those of Dicey, having been largely unexplored in contemporary analyses of our constitutional development. It examines the importance of Bryce's views on two particular constitutional mechanisms – responsible government and judicial review – to the development of our constitutional structure. The ongoing theoretical implications of The American Commonwealth for Australian constitutional law remain to be pondered.

The New Economic Populism and the Future of Inequality in the United States

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
William W. Franko ◽  
Christopher Witko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Labor Unions ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Empirical Results ◽  
Income Disparities ◽  
The Face ◽  
Over Time

The authors conclude the book by recapping their arguments and empirical results, and discussing the possibilities for the “new economic populism” to promote egalitarian economic outcomes in the face of continuing gridlock and the dominance of Washington, DC’s policymaking institutions by business and the wealthy, and a conservative Republican Party. Many states are actually addressing inequality now, and these policies are working. Admittedly, many states also continue to embrace the policies that have contributed to growing inequality, such as tax cuts for the wealthy or attempting to weaken labor unions. But as the public grows more concerned about inequality, the authors argue, policies that help to address these income disparities will become more popular, and policies that exacerbate inequality will become less so. Over time, if history is a guide, more egalitarian policies will spread across the states, and ultimately to the federal government.

International Agreements and U.S. Foreign Relations Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 155-171
Author(s):  
Jean Galbraith
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Constitutional History ◽  
Administrative Reforms ◽  
Administrative Efficiency ◽  
International Commitments

Over its constitutional history, the United States has developed multiple ways of joining, implementing, and terminating treaties and other international commitments. This chapter provides an overview of the law governing these pathways and considers the extent to which comparative law has influenced them or could do so in the future. Focusing in particular on the making of international commitments, the chapter describes how, over time, the United States came to develop alternatives to the process set out in the U.S. Constitution’s Treaty Clause, which requires the approval of two-thirds of the Senate. These alternatives arose partly from reasons of administrative efficiency and partly from presidential interest in making important international commitments in situations where two-thirds of the Senate would be unobtainable. These alternatives have had the effect of considerably increasing the president’s constitutional power to make international commitments. Nonetheless, considerable constraints remain on presidential power in this context, with some of these constraints stemming from constitutional law and others from statutory, administrative, and international law. With respect to comparative law, the chapter observes that U.S. practice historically has been largely but not entirely self-contained. Looking ahead, comparative practice is unlikely to affect U.S. constitutional law with respect to international agreements, but it might hold insights for legislative or administrative reforms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document