The Agreement Is Still In Effect

See Reid v. Covert, 354 U.P. 1, 16-17 (1957) (plural opinion) (reply to dicta in Holland by specifying that contractual force is subject to certain constitutional restrictions); Bond v. United States, 134 p. Ct. 2077, 2098 (2014) (Scalia, J. agrees with the judgment) (joined by Thomas, J.) (Describes Hollande`s interpretation of the necessary and appropriate clause as an “unfounded and unciting sentence” that is not supported by the text or structure of the Constitution.) Nicholas Quinn Rosaire, Execution of Contractual Power, 118 Harv. L. Rev. 1867, 1868 (2005) (argues that the Dutch interpretation of the necessary and appropriate clause “is erroneous and the case should be reversed”). In the 1950s, Senator John Bricker of Ohio made efforts to limit the extent of the contractual force described in Holland through a constitutional amendment. One version of the proposed amendment, known as the “Bricker Amendment,” would have provided that a “treaty in the United States shall be effective only by laws that would be valid in the absence of a treaty.” See P. Comm.

On the Judiciary, 83rd Cong., Proposals to Amendment the Treaty-Making Commissions of the Constitution: Views of Deans and Professors of Law 3 (1953). No version of the Bricker amendment was ever accepted. Others say the U.S. withdrawal is due in part to the Obama administration`s failure to get the Paris Agreement ratified by the U.S. Senate. Although the agreement was signed in December 2015, the agreement did not enter into force until 4 November 2016, 30 days after it was ratified by at least 55 countries representing 55% of global emissions.