Pirate's Cove

Politico thinks this is a bad thing, yet, how many employees have given up their own use of fossil fuels, moved into a tiny home, stopped eating meat, and only buy second-hand clothes, among other measures?

Quitting Paris was just the start

Wait, I don’t have global heating on here?

The Trump administration has been dropping hints it may exit the world’s oldest climate treaty — a move that would go way beyond his withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Agreement.

While in line with the president’s anti-climate action agenda, a retreat from the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change could ultimately curtail President Donald Trump’s international influence, writes Sara Schonhardt.

“If we pull out, then we essentially yield the field to anti-fossil-fuel interests,” George David Banks, who led international climate policy in the first Trump White House, told Sara.

How so? Well, I read ahead, and the Politico article doesn’t say. How about that link to Schonhardt’s speculative article?

Rather than quit, he said the administration could identify countries it can work with under the framework — such as Saudi Arabia and Russia — to push for a pro-fossil-fuel agenda.

“Given the fact that the President has made energy dominance and energy exports a priority for the administration, … he should be very concerned and very engaged in venues that oppose that agenda,” Banks said.

Yeah, that really doesn’t clear up why exiting would be Bad for the fossil fuels interests. Seriously, could it be worse than what the climate cultists are doing now? Regardless, both articles are all about “hints”, with zero concrete proof. But, could he really do this?

If Trump does pull the country out of the framework, it could be difficult for a new president to undo. Joining a treaty requires a two-thirds Senate vote — a high hurdle even in less polarized times — though some legal scholars say a new administration could rely on the 1992 Senate vote.

But, can a president actually pull out of a treaty unilateraly?

If asked whether the President alone possesses a general, sweeping unilateral power to terminate every U.S. treaty in force, a layperson might well answer “no.” But among the legal academic community, the conventional wisdom seems to be “yes,” or at least “maybe.”4 On closer study, however, that conventional wisdom rests not on constitutional text, structure, or Supreme Court precedent, but on the thin reed of historical practice that followed the Court’s summary disposition nearly four decades ago in Goldwater v. Carter.5 In that case, the Court declined to review President Jimmy Carter’s unilateral termination of a bilateral treaty with Taiwan in accordance with its terms, but—like the Constitution’s text—the Justices left undecided which branch of government has the power of treaty withdrawal, and under what circumstances.6

The essay where I got that argues that a president cannot pull out of a Senate approved treaty.

And on the merits, no blanket power authorizes a unilateral presidential power to terminate international agreements. The Constitution does not directly address treaty withdrawal.

So, yes? No? Maybe? But, is the Trump admin even considering this? I guess we’ll find out.

Read: Good News: Quitting The Paris Climate (scam) Agreement Is Just The Start »