Difference between revisions of "Corker law"
m (Reverted edits by NotARINOFaggot (talk) to last revision by DavidB4-bot) |
DavidB4-bot (talk | contribs) m (→top: HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced: http://thehill.com → https://thehill.com) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The '''Corker Law''', officially known as Bipartisan Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act and informally still called the "Corker bill," is a misguided federal law that circumvents the [[Treaty Clause]] in the [[U.S. Constitution]], and essentially requires not a 2/3rds vote to ratify a foreign treaty, but a 2/3rds vote to reject one (in order to override a presidential veto). In other words, the Corker law replaces the Treaty Clause with respect to Iran such that a majority vote in Congress can reject the deal, but the president can then reject the congressional vote, which would require a 2/3rds vote by each house of Congress to override the veto. | The '''Corker Law''', officially known as Bipartisan Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act and informally still called the "Corker bill," is a misguided federal law that circumvents the [[Treaty Clause]] in the [[U.S. Constitution]], and essentially requires not a 2/3rds vote to ratify a foreign treaty, but a 2/3rds vote to reject one (in order to override a presidential veto). In other words, the Corker law replaces the Treaty Clause with respect to Iran such that a majority vote in Congress can reject the deal, but the president can then reject the congressional vote, which would require a 2/3rds vote by each house of Congress to override the veto. | ||
| − | Only one senator voted against this law: [[Tom Cotton]], who explains that it violates the Constitution. He explained:<ref> | + | Only one senator voted against this law: [[Tom Cotton]], who explains that it violates the Constitution. He explained:<ref>https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/241355-senate-votes-to-approve-Iran-review-bill</ref> |
{{cquote|A nuclear-arms agreement with any adversary—especially the terror-sponsoring, Islamist Iranian regime—should be submitted as a treaty and obtain a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate as required by the Constitution.}} | {{cquote|A nuclear-arms agreement with any adversary—especially the terror-sponsoring, Islamist Iranian regime—should be submitted as a treaty and obtain a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate as required by the Constitution.}} | ||
Disappointingly, Senator's [[Ted Cruz]] and [[Rand Paul]] voted for the Corker bill. | Disappointingly, Senator's [[Ted Cruz]] and [[Rand Paul]] voted for the Corker bill. | ||
Latest revision as of 15:01, September 26, 2018
The Corker Law, officially known as Bipartisan Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act and informally still called the "Corker bill," is a misguided federal law that circumvents the Treaty Clause in the U.S. Constitution, and essentially requires not a 2/3rds vote to ratify a foreign treaty, but a 2/3rds vote to reject one (in order to override a presidential veto). In other words, the Corker law replaces the Treaty Clause with respect to Iran such that a majority vote in Congress can reject the deal, but the president can then reject the congressional vote, which would require a 2/3rds vote by each house of Congress to override the veto.
Only one senator voted against this law: Tom Cotton, who explains that it violates the Constitution. He explained:[1]
| “ | A nuclear-arms agreement with any adversary—especially the terror-sponsoring, Islamist Iranian regime—should be submitted as a treaty and obtain a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate as required by the Constitution. | ” |
Disappointingly, Senator's Ted Cruz and Rand Paul voted for the Corker bill.
Background
Senator Bob Corker, a RINO from Tennessee, introduced this bill as a compromise with respect to the proposed deal being negotiated by the Obama Administration with Iran.
Constitutionality
The U.S. Supreme Court has never addressed the constitutionality of this approach.