Executive Orders Vs Executive Agreements

97 See Panayiota, Alexandropoulos, Enforceability of Executive Congressional Agreements in Lieu of an Article II Extradition Treaty: Elizaphan Ntakirutimana v. Janet Reno, 45 Vill. L. Rev. 107, 113-14 (2000) (on the grounds that the Valentine Supreme Court has clearly established the legality of an extradition under an executive agreement); see also Klarevas, Louis, The Surrender of Alleged War Criminals to International Tribunal: Examining the Constitutionality of Extradition via Congressional-Executive Agreement, 8 UCLA J. Int`l. For. Aff. 77, 107 (2003) (other cases in support of Valentine`s interpretation that she authorized extradition on the basis of an executive agreement). The dataset consists of all agreements notified in the Intermediate Treaty States (TIF) that were signed and ratified between 1982 and 2012. Footnote 67 TIF is the official collection of international agreements maintained by the U.S. State Department. It contains information on the date of signing, the parties and the purpose of the agreement, as well as the entry into force of the agreement.

TIF agreements are included in the Kavass Treaty Guide in the Force (Guide). Footnote 68 The guide is an annual accompanying TIF publication, first published in 1982, which contains additional useful information such as the purpose of the contract, a brief description and the contracting parties. The TIF uses a sophisticated, but partly inconsistent, system to categorize chords by theme. Footnote 69 In total, there are 197 different subjects in the data set, many with single-digit observations. This article reduces the size of these themes to thirty-eight coherent thematic categories in the online appendix. For each agreement, the guide also refers to a « Senate Contract Document Number. » This number is assigned to any contract submitted to the Senate as part of the consultation and approval process. Executive agreements do not receive a contract number from the Senate. The number can therefore be used to determine which agreement is a contract in the database and what agreement has been reached in the form of an executive agreement. 83 See McLaughlin, C.H., The Scope of the Treaty Power in the States II, 43 Minn. L.

Rev. 651, 721 (1958) (calculates that 5.9% of the agreements were concluded between 1883 and 1957 as exclusive executive agreements or « presidential agreements »); see also International Agreements: An Analysis of Executive Regulations and Practices, at 22, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 95th Congress, 1st Sess. (1977) (calculation that 5.5% of the agreements from 1946 to 1972 were exclusively based on executive power). Let`s look at the first ex-post executive agreements of Congress. As mentioned above, ex-congress executive agreements are rare, with a share of less than 1 percent in 1980 and 2000. Table 6 contains results on the contract indicator coefficient when the model is executed separately on ex-post congressional executive agreements and all other international commitments. Footnote 101 While most model specifications suggest that there may be a permanence difference between ex post congress executive agreements and contracts, this difference is much smaller and statistically insignificant. In each model specification containing other executive agreements, the difference is significant and statistically significant.

As a result, the evidence is consistent with the view that the differences between the treaties and the executive agreements of Congress for ex post executive agreements are less pronounced. In total, the data set contains 7,966 agreements. Each agreement is monitored once a year once a year, as long as it is in force, and once it ends, resulting in a total of 129,518 observations per year and by agreement.