Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Hull Lothian Deal case brief

Hull Lothian Deal case brief summary

-US Sec of State and the UK broker a deal to trade ships for army bases, but made it look like it wasn’t a quid pro quo.
-They couldn’t break international law (the US was at peace with the UK’s enemies and thus, could not sell it warships).
-They argued that belligerents were estopped from raising questions about their possible breaking of the Hague Convention.

(This is not a treaty because the executive branch can not make a treaty itself.)

Was the US bound since this wasn't sent to the Senate? 
-Yes, even if the agreement is illegal under US law, the US is still bound.
See Article 46 of the Vienna Convention .

How to know the difference in an executive agreement and a treaty:
-Treaty—requires implementation in American law.
-This was an executive agreement. (President power is plenary).
-Executive agreements can be secret if they involve national security. 
-You just have to inform the intelligence committees on in both houses of the legislature.

Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Evolution of Legal Marketing: From Billboards to Digital Leads Over the last couple of decades, the face of legal marketing has changed a l...