The proposed Iran nuclear deal is conventionally an executive deal and should not be a treaty with senate advice and approval, but Congress should be able to do so, as sanctions ordered by Congress should be lifted. The Supreme Court of the United States, in united states v. Pink (1942), considered that international executive agreements that have been concluded in force have the same legal status as treaties and do not require the approval of the Senate. In Reid v. Covert (1957), while reaffirming the President`s ability to enter into executive agreements, he decided that such agreements could not be contrary to federal law or the Constitution in force. The use of executive contracts increased significantly after 1939. Before 1940, the U.S. Senate had ratified 800 treaties and presidents had concluded 1200 executive agreements; From 1940 to 1989, during World War II and the Cold War, presidents signed nearly 800 treaties, but negotiated more than 13,000 executive agreements. Britannica.com: Encyclopedia articles on the executive agreement As far as we are concerned, Congress does not have the ability to modify an executive agreement. Note: An executive agreement does not have the same weight as a treaty, unless it is supported by a joint resolution. Unlike a contract, an executive agreement can replace a conflicting national law, but not a federal law. The U.S.
Constitution does not explicitly give a president the power to enter into executive agreements. However, it may be authorized to do so by Congress or it may do so on the basis of the power to manage foreign relations granted to it. More information on U.S. executive foreign policy agreements can be found in the foreign policy of executive agreements. An agreement between heads of government of two or more nations that has not been ratified by the legislature because the treaties have been ratified. Executive agreements are considered politically binding in order to distinguish them from legally binding treaties. . . .