Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T09:03:30.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Good Friday Accords: Legislative Veto by Another Name?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Michael J. Glennon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On March 24, 1989—Good Friday—President Bush and congressional leaders signed a landmark agreement committing them to support nonlethal aid for the Nicaraguan contras, together with Central American peace efforts. Under this “gentleman’s agreement,” aid would continue through February 1990. But in November 1989, the President must get letters from each of four congressional committees approving the continuation of aid after that month. If a majority of the membership of any one of those committees declines to authorize the letter, the President agreed, he will terminate the aid.

Type
Editorial Comments
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 83 , Issue 3 , July 1989 , pp. 544 - 546
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Bush and Congress Sign Policy Accord on Aid to Contras—New Unity Is Cited—Lawmakers Being Given Power of Virtual Veto Over the Program, N.Y. Times, Mar. 25, 1989, at 1, col. 1.

2 Id.

3 President Signs Contra Aid Pact With Congress, N.Y. Times, Mar. 25, 1989, at 5, col. 6. This provision is set out in collateral “secret agreements” between the President and congressional leaders. Id.

4 Pact Challenged By Bush Counsel—Latin Agreement Seen As Too Empowering for Congress, N.Y. Times, Mar. 26, 1989, §1, at 1, col. 5 [hereinafter Pact Challenged].

5 New Contra Plan: A Break from Past Approach, N.Y. Times, Mar. 25, 1989, at 5, col. 3.

6 Id., col. 2.

7 462 U.S. 919 (1983).

8 Id. at 974 (White, J., dissenting). Justice White concluded that “[t]he Court’s Article I analysis appears to invalidate all legislative vetoes irrespective of form or substance.” Id.

9 462 U.S. at 952.

10 See L. Fisher, The Constitution Between Friends, at v (1978).

11 Pact Challenged, supra note 4, at 8, col. 5.

12 Statement by Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, Sept. 23, 77 Dep’t St. Bull. 642 (1977).

13 See, e.g., S. Rep. NO. 499, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. (1977).

14 See Letter from Herbert J. Hansell, Legal Adviser of the Department of State, to John J. Sparkman, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sept. 28, 1977, reprinted in id. at 9–10 (quoting Paul Warnke, Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency).

15 Most were of the committee-veto variety. L. Fisher, Constitutional Dialogues: Interpretation as Political Process 225 (1988). For specific examples, see Fisher, Judicial Misjudgments About the Law-Making Process: The Legislative Veto Case, 45 Pub. Ad. Rev. 705, 706–07 (1985).

16 L. Fisher, supra note 15, at 225.

17 108 S.Ct. 2597 (1988).

18 109 S.Ct. 647 (1989).