A treaty negotiated and, with the consent of two thirds of the Senators present, ratified by the President, must "be regarded in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the legislature"1
[1] Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. (2. Pet.) 253, 314 (1829) (Marshall, C.J.). Although the President may, or course, terminate a treaty in accord with its terms, cf. Goldwater v. Carter, 444 U.S. 996 (1979) (refusing to adjudicate validity of treaty termination without Senate consent), discussed in § 3-13 supra, he is not free to treat a treaty as though it meant something entirely different from what it ways, and was presented to the Senate as meaning at the time the Senate was asked to give its consent under art II, § 2. See "Constitutional Principles Constraining the President's Reinterpretation of the ABM Treaty," Testimony of Laurence H. Tribe Before Joint Hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations and Senate Judiciary Committees, 100th Cong. (March 11, 1987)....
SOURCE: American Constitutional Law, 3 Ed., Vol 1, Laurence H. Tribe, Foundation Press, 2000, pp. 643-4.
Guffaw