No, that is not the case. It’s clear black and white in the constitution. It does not become a treaty unless 2/3 of the Senate ratifies it. The rest of the world think the leader of a country with his signature can join the treaty. But they are all well aware that that does not apply to United States. They try to pretend it’s not true, but it is. There has never been a supreme court case that has held a treaty to be law of the land without Senate confirmation.
There is no Senate pocket veto approval. For executive orders, yes. But not for a treaty. If it does not get submitted for the Senate approval, it can be killed by the incoming Trump administration. The Paris climate treaty is a classical recent example.
i had posted the rule awhile back in another similar thread, and a link to the segment on newsmax that spoke about it- if congress doesn’t act- then it ‘becomes binding’ according to the rule that apparently is still in effect- =- I might have the basics a bit skewed, but somehow a president can act without the need for congress to act- mind too tired to think right now-
I will see if i can find it tomorrow- too late right now-
[[ But it does not become part of the constitution the way a treaty elevates after Senate confirmation. The next president can abrogate it.]]
Yes, that is true- but it is supposedly ‘binding’ according to the rule until a different president undoes it- I didnt state my previous posts quite correctly- but im sure it has soemthign to do with congress not acting- but again, i’ll go through my posts tomorrow and see if i can find the link-