Foreign Policy and the Constitution #1: The Executive Branch

Nearly ninety years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the president is “the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations,” wielding an exclusive power “which does not require as a basis for its exercise an act of Congress but which, of course, like every other governmental power, must be exercised in subordination to the applicable provisions of the Constitution.” (United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 1936).

It unnerves me to think I could be detained and deported any time someone in the executive branch, unfettered in foreign affairs, decides one of my blog posts threatens current U.S. international policy. It’s unlikely to happen soon. I am a white, straight, cis, native-English-speaking, American-born daughter of two naturalized immigrants. Still, if it can happen to one U.S. citizen or legal resident, it can happen to any of us. More likely, first I’ll lose access to email and social media on the grounds that my words endanger national security.

Under the Constitution, the president is commander in chief. It authorizes him to make treaties and appoint ambassadors, with advice and consent of the Senate. Congress may delegate other powers to him, but according to Curtiss-Wright, in international affairs he can act without delegation from Congress. The only guardrails appear to be those in the Bill of Rights and other parts of the Constitution. May those guardrails be strong enough to save us from crashing off the cliff.