Which of the following Is True of an Executive Agreement Made between a United States President

As a copy editor, I first want to clarify that the topic provided is not related to SEO. However, I can provide an article on the topic “Which of the following is true of an executive agreement made between a United States president.”

An executive agreement is an agreement between the U.S. president and a foreign government or international organization that does not require Senate confirmation. This type of agreement can be used to address a variety of issues, from commercial trade and investment to military cooperation and environmental protection.

Here are some truths about executive agreements:

1. They are legally binding: Although executive agreements do not undergo the ratification process of a treaty, they are still legally binding on the United States and the other party. This means that both parties are expected to uphold their commitments under the agreement.

2. They can be terminated: Unlike treaties, executive agreements can be terminated at any time. This can be done unilaterally by the president, or by mutual agreement between the parties.

3. They are subject to Congressional oversight: While executive agreements do not need to be ratified by the Senate, they are still subject to oversight by Congress. Congress can review the terms of the agreement and hold hearings to consider its impact on U.S. interests.

4. They cannot override U.S. law: Executive agreements cannot override existing U.S. law. If there is a conflict between an executive agreement and federal law, the law takes precedence.

5. They are a useful tool for U.S. diplomacy: Executive agreements can be a useful tool for U.S. diplomacy, as they allow the president to negotiate and implement agreements quickly without going through the lengthy treaty ratification process.

In conclusion, executive agreements are a type of international agreement that is legally binding, subject to oversight by Congress, and can be terminated at any time. They are a useful tool for U.S. diplomacy, but cannot override existing U.S. law.

Scroll to Top