Changes

The Paris climate agreement was specifically worded to use non-binding language for much of its contents, including the actual emissions level that the nations are meant to cut.<ref>https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/your-top-5-questions-about-the-paris-climate-agreement-answered</ref> The use of non-binding language was likely intended to allow the agreement to 'count' as an [[executive agreement]] rather than a treaty, as the Constitution stipulates that ratification of a treaty requires the supermajority consent of the Senate.

The Paris climate agreement was specifically worded to use non-binding language for much of its contents, including the actual emissions level that the nations are meant to cut.<ref>https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/your-top-5-questions-about-the-paris-climate-agreement-answered</ref> The use of non-binding language was likely intended to allow the agreement to 'count' as an [[executive agreement]] rather than a treaty, as the Constitution stipulates that ratification of a treaty requires the supermajority consent of the Senate.

However, binding executive agreements are only allowed within the President's authority. The Paris Agreement does not entirely fall into the President's authority, so its binding articles are problematic. As a result, some analysts and commentators have argued that the binding articles of the Paris Agreement (such as its 4 year exit period) make it a treaty that cannot be ratified without the consent of the Senate, which would make the agreement unratified and Obama's executive order unconstitutional.<ref>http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-paris-agreement-treaty-and-should-be-submitted-the-senate</ref><ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/01/the-u-s-cant-quit-the-paris-climate-agreement-because-it-never-actually-joined/</ref>

However, binding executive agreements are only allowed within the President's authority. The Paris Agreement does not entirely fall into the President's authority, so its binding articles are problematic. As a result, some analysts and commentators have argued that the binding articles of the Paris Agreement (such as its 4-year exit period) make it a treaty that cannot be ratified without the consent of the Senate, which would make the agreement unratified and Obama's executive order unconstitutional.<ref name="heritage.org">http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-paris-agreement-treaty-and-should-be-submitted-the-senate</ref><ref>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/01/the-u-s-cant-quit-the-paris-climate-agreement-because-it-never-actually-joined/</ref>

==U.S. withdrawal==

==U.S. withdrawal==

Although many environmentalists opposed the Paris agreement for not being strong enough, they opposed the U.S. withdrawal, with some accusing President Trump of committing "environmental racism."<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/trump-accused-of-environmental-racism-in-withdrawal-from-paris-agreement/ Trump Accused of ‘Environmental Racism’ in Withdrawal from Paris Agreement]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>

Although many environmentalists opposed the Paris agreement for not being strong enough, they opposed the U.S. withdrawal, with some accusing President Trump of committing "environmental racism."<ref>Williams, Thomas D. (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/trump-accused-of-environmental-racism-in-withdrawal-from-paris-agreement/ Trump Accused of ‘Environmental Racism’ in Withdrawal from Paris Agreement]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>

Some globalists, such as EU Commission President [[Jean Claude-Juncker]],<ref>https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-climate-juncker-you-cant-leave-paris-deal-overnight/</ref> said that Trump's decision to leave the agreement was illegal because the supposedly non-binding agreement had a clause that does not allow countries to leave until 4 years after its ratification.<ref>https://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/</ref> As stated earlier in the 'legality' section, the argument that the clause is binding would defeat the argument that Obama had the authority to enter the agreement without the consent of the Senate. Some respond that the authority for the legally binding elements of the agreement are derived from the UNFCCC, a prior agreement that was ratified by Congress,<ref>https://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/</ref> but the UNFCCC does not mention many of the binding elements in the Paris Agreement, such as the requirement for emission 'targets'.<ref>http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-paris-agreement-treaty-and-should-be-submitted-the-senate</ref> A very small minority believe that President Trump's decision to leave the agreement was illegal due to the fact that it was performed unilaterally with an executive order. Even ignoring the [[Liberal hypocrisy]] in their beliefs, the Supreme Court essentially legalized the unilateral withdrawal from any agreements by refusing to hear a case against President Carter's decision to withdraw from the China-US Mutual Defense Treaty, which was a binding agreement ratified by the Senate.<ref>https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-02/trump-paris-climate-change-and-constitutional-realities</ref>

Some globalists, such as EU Commission President [[Jean Claude-Juncker]],<ref>https://www.politico.eu/article/trump-climate-juncker-you-cant-leave-paris-deal-overnight/</ref> said that Trump's decision to leave the agreement was illegal because the supposedly non-binding agreement had a clause that does not allow countries to leave until 4 years after its ratification.<ref name="snopes.com">https://www.snopes.com/2017/06/01/authority-paris-agreement/</ref> As stated earlier in the 'legality' section, the argument that the clause is binding would defeat the argument that Obama had the authority to enter the agreement without the consent of the Senate. Some respond that the authority for the legally binding elements of the agreement are derived from the UNFCCC, a prior agreement that was ratified by Congress,<ref name="snopes.com"/> but the UNFCCC does not mention many of the binding elements in the Paris Agreement, such as the requirement for emission 'targets'.<ref name="heritage.org"/> A very small minority believe that President Trump's decision to leave the agreement was illegal due to the fact that it was performed unilaterally with an executive order. Even ignoring the [[Liberal hypocrisy]] in their beliefs, the Supreme Court essentially legalized the unilateral withdrawal from any agreements by refusing to hear a case against President Carter's decision to withdraw from the China-US Mutual Defense Treaty, which was a binding agreement ratified by the Senate.<ref>https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-06-02/trump-paris-climate-change-and-constitutional-realities</ref>

According to a [[Washington Post]]–[[ABC News]] poll, 59% of Americans opposed the decision to withdraw from the agreement versus 28% in support.<ref>Savransy, Rebecca (June 5, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/336408-poll-public-opposes-trumps-withdrawal-from-paris-deal-by-21-margin Poll: Public opposes Trump's withdrawal from Paris deal by 2:1 margin]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref> However, a Rasmussen poll found that 41% of Americans believed the Paris agreement would have increased energy costs versus 20% thinking the opposite and 23% saying it would have no effect.<ref>Starr, Penny (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/poll-americans-agree-with-trump-on-paris-agreement-41-say-deal-would-increase-energy-costs/ Poll: Americans Agree with Trump on Paris Agreement: 41% Say Deal Would Increase Energy Costs]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>

According to a [[Washington Post]]–[[ABC News]] poll, 59% of Americans opposed the decision to withdraw from the agreement versus 28% in support.<ref>Savransy, Rebecca (June 5, 2017). [http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/336408-poll-public-opposes-trumps-withdrawal-from-paris-deal-by-21-margin Poll: Public opposes Trump's withdrawal from Paris deal by 2:1 margin]. ''The Hill''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref> However, a Rasmussen poll found that 41% of Americans believed the Paris agreement would have increased energy costs versus 20% thinking the opposite and 23% saying it would have no effect.<ref>Starr, Penny (June 6, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/poll-americans-agree-with-trump-on-paris-agreement-41-say-deal-would-increase-energy-costs/ Poll: Americans Agree with Trump on Paris Agreement: 41% Say Deal Would Increase Energy Costs]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved June 6, 2017.</ref>