Lawyers in Space

 

Now Richard can call me a space cadet for something besides my views on judicial review. Today, the New York Times publishes an article by me and John Bolton (former U.S. Ambassador to the UN) criticizing the Obama administration’s continuing evasion of the Senate’s role over treaties — in this case, over European efforts to create an arms control regime for space.

The European code of conduct for outer space would restrict US primacy in space by limiting the kinds of anti-satellite, anti-missile, and surveillance systems that the US can develop and deploy. Knowing the political opposition this would spark, the Obama administration did not send an agreement to the Senate, but instead said it would “voluntarily” follow the code.  While Ambassador Bolton and I are both supporters of a vigorous executive in national security and foreign affairs, we think that the Senate must approve agreements where the U.S. gives up national sovereignty, particularly in an area like arms control.

There are 7 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Profile Photo Contributor
    @Midge
    John Yoo: Now Richard can call me a space cadet for something besides my views on judicial review…

    …and some people can call you a space cowboy

    …but not Maurice!

    • #1
  2. Profile Photo Member
    @ScarletPimpernel

    You keep this up, and the Left will try to exile you to a satellite campus.

    • #2
  3. Profile Photo Member
    @ScarletPimpernel

    P.S. Does the President have the right simply not to do anything contrary to what the Europeans ask, and claim it is a matter of choice, but not the law of the land. I don’t see why not. President Obama does not seem to be saying that he is creating a binding legal precedent. Or perhaps I miss something.

    • #3
  4. Profile Photo Podcaster
    @EJHill

    What’s the difference between “voluntarily following the code” and a simple statement of administration policy unless it directly conflicts with an Senate-approved obligation to non-NATO member?

    There’s nothing there that would prevent future administrations from pursuing other courses of action, is there? (Except for the fact that, right now, we’re so broke we couldn’t put a monkey with a pea shooter in orbit!)

    • #4
  5. Profile Photo Member
    @user_211930

    Are treaties anything other than pacifiers for the pundits and kowtows to the ruling elites to reassure them that, yes, they are running everything?

    Russia signed the Treaty of Tilsit with the French and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with Germany shortly before being invaded by each.

    • #5
  6. Profile Photo Member
    @JerrytheBastage

    What does this have to do with outreach to Muslim youth?

    • #6
  7. Profile Photo Thatcher
    @JamesGawron

    John,

    When the Obamite Administration spokesperson was pressed on this he said, “Constitution, Man we don’t need no stinkin Constitution”.

    I predict sooner or later it will come down to the “I” word.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #7

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.