The Senate Role in Treaty Ratification
- 1 April 1983
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Journal of International Law
- Vol. 77 (2), 257-280
- https://doi.org/10.2307/2200853
Abstract
Others, though content that treaties should be made in the mode proposed, are averse to their being the supreme law of the land. They insist, and profess to believe, that treaties like acts of assembly, should be repealable at pleasure. This idea seems to be new and peculiar to this country, but new errors, as well as new truths, often appear. These gentlemen would do well to reflect that a treaty is only another name for a bargain, and that it would be impossible to find a nation who would make any bargain with us, which should be binding on them absolutely, but on us only so long and so far as we may think proper to be bound by it. The Federalist No. 64 (Jay)Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- The International Legal Obligations of Signatories to an Unratified TreatyPublished by Taylor & Francis ,2017
- Ceasefire between the Branches: A Compact in Foreign AffairsForeign Affairs, 1982
- Congress versus the President: The Formulation and Implementation of American Foreign PolicyForeign Affairs, 1981
- Congress in Foreign Policy: Who Needs It?Foreign Affairs, 1978
- The Twilight Existence of Nonbinding International AgreementsAmerican Journal of International Law, 1977
- Word Made Law: The Decision of the ICJ in the Nuclear Test CasesAmerican Journal of International Law, 1975
- Some Reflections on the Vienna Convention on the Law of TreatiesFederal Law Review, 1975
- The Impotence of ReticenceDuke Law Journal, 1968
- The Treaty Makers and the Law Makers: The Niagara ReservationColumbia Law Review, 1956
- The International Binding Force of Unilateral Oral DeclarationsAmerican Journal of International Law, 1933