Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JCPOA never ratified by Congress
Me, myself and I | 06/16/2026 | ChatGTP

Posted on 06/16/2026 7:59:06 PM PDT by Az Joe

The JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) was not approved by Congress through an up-or-down vote the way a treaty would be.

Instead, Congress passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) in 2015, which gave Congress the right to review the agreement and pass a resolution of approval or disapproval. If Congress did nothing, the agreement could proceed.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: congress; iran; jcpoa; vanity; vanitypostedinnews; waronterror
Message from Jim Robinson:

Dear FRiends,

We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.

If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:

Click here: to donate by Credit Card

Or here: to donate by PayPal

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794

Thank you very much and God bless you,

Jim

What happened in 2015:

The Republican-controlled House voted to disapprove the JCPOA. A majority of Senators also opposed the deal. However, supporters of the deal had enough votes in the Senate to block a disapproval resolution from advancing, preventing Congress from stopping the agreement. Because Congress never passed a disapproval resolution that could survive a presidential veto, the Obama administration was able to implement the JCPOA.

A key distinction is that the JCPOA was treated as an executive agreement, not a treaty. Therefore it did not require the Constitution's treaty process of a two-thirds vote in the Senate for ratification.

1 posted on 06/16/2026 7:59:06 PM PDT by Az Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

There is a lot of subsequent blood-letting on Obama’s hands for this treasonous agreement with Iran...


2 posted on 06/16/2026 8:11:17 PM PDT by SuperLuminal (Where is rabble-rising Sam Adams now that we need him? Is his name Trump, now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Nuclear_Agreement_Review_Act_of_2015


3 posted on 06/16/2026 8:11:42 PM PDT by Az Joe (Pope Marx I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

It’s not a treaty. It doesn’t need confirmation by the senate.


4 posted on 06/16/2026 8:14:18 PM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

WTF are you talking about?


5 posted on 06/16/2026 8:21:22 PM PDT by Az Joe (Pope Marx I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

He’s right, having never bene ratified by congress it was never a treaty, executive agreements are only between the current president and the nation(s) signing. They are not binding constitutionally and only serve as a legal requirement as long as the president (current or future) decides to abide by it, can be withdrawn at any time at the presidents pleasure.

Some idiots try to claim it as a treaty under international law but that is completely bogus as our constitution only allows for congress to authorize the treaty as binding at that legal level.

I personally am for this Trump deal but have my doubts he will get it past congress as a treaty (if he decides to go that way) for the same reasons Obozo couldn’t only this time it will be dems blocking it for political reasons, not because it was bad for the country.


6 posted on 06/17/2026 3:06:27 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Skwor

Now WTF are you talking about?


7 posted on 06/17/2026 3:18:37 AM PDT by Az Joe (Pope Marx I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

Exactly what I stated, it is not a treaty, nothing more nothing less.


8 posted on 06/17/2026 3:29:32 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: Az Joe
If Congress did nothing, the agreement could proceed.

If Congress did something, it still could proceed because Congress never had the authority in the first place.

I remember when McConnell thought up this inversion of the treaty clause, and he was widely criticized for it at the time.

It was either a treaty or it wasn't. Congress acted like it wasn't, therefore they had no other means to accept or reject the deal without violating separation of powers.

-PJ

10 posted on 06/17/2026 3:42:30 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too ( * LAAP = Left-wing Activist Agitprop Press (formerly known as the MSM))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

LOL no, I was just saying he is right it is not a treaty, not anything about your thread, also just noting some people try to make it one for stupid reasons.

Your op thread clearly states it is not a treaty.

Ease up, all posts are not an assessment or vote for or against you.


11 posted on 06/17/2026 3:45:13 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Yep, exactly because “it was not a treaty”


12 posted on 06/17/2026 3:46:27 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

Understanding Treaties vs. Executive Agreements in U.S. International Law

https://govfacts.org/policy-security/international-relations/treaties-agreements/understanding-treaties-vs-executive-agreements-in-u-s-international-law/


13 posted on 06/17/2026 3:47:44 AM PDT by Skwor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

Is English not your first language?

JCPOA wasn’t a “treaty.”

The Senate has to confirm Treaties.

Since it wasn’t a Treaty, the Senate doesn’t have to approve of it.

Congress has zero to do with that.


14 posted on 06/17/2026 4:06:59 AM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Az Joe

Furthermore, Trump severed our relationship with the WHO, but congress fails to move it past executive order and into law.
Trump’s efforts can be undone in a heartbeat because congress is weak.


15 posted on 06/17/2026 4:31:09 AM PDT by SisterK (to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SisterK

Trump’s efforts can be undone in a heartbeat because congress is weak.
~~~~~

Reversing Trump’s Iran agreement would require a law, and the law would require Trump’s signature. That’s not going to happen.


16 posted on 06/17/2026 6:59:48 AM PDT by nagant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: nagant
the next administration (if we lose) can reverse all of Trump's work if it is not law
17 posted on 06/17/2026 4:25:05 PM PDT by SisterK (to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson