Some constitutional scientists, such as Lawerence Tribe, have argued that CAs are unconstitutional because they circumvent the treaty notification system established by the U.S. Constitution. U.S. courts have rejected this argument and have held that such agreements are not treaties. What is the difference between a treaty and an executive agreement? An executive agreement is an agreement between the heads of government of two or more nations that has not been ratified by the legislature when treaties are ratified. Executive agreements are considered politically binding in order to distinguish them from legally binding treaties. The use of executive contracts increased significantly after 1939. Before 1940, the U.S. Senate had ratified 800 treaties and presidents had concluded 1200 executive agreements; From 1940 to 1989, during World War II and the Cold War, presidents signed nearly 800 treaties, but negotiated more than 13,000 executive agreements.
Britannica.com: Encyclopedia Articles on the Executive Agreement The Supreme Court of the United States, at United States v. Pink (1942), held that international executive agreements that have been duly concluded have the same legal status as treaties and do not require Senate approval. In Reid v. Covert (1957), while reaffirming the President`s ability to enter into executive agreements, he decided that such agreements could not be contrary to federal law or the Constitution in force. An agreement between Congress and the executive branch is an agreement with a foreign power approved by Congress and the United States. Unlike a treaty, in the constitutional sense of the word, it does not replace existing law and does not require a two-thirds majority of the Senate, but is passed as an ordinary law that requires majority votes of the House and Senate, followed by the approval of the President. Many nations, which are republics with written constitutions, have constitutional requirements for ratifying treaties. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is based on executive agreements. In the United States, executive agreements are binding internationally when negotiated and concluded under the authority of the president on foreign policy, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, or a previous act of Congress. For example, the president, as commander-in-chief, negotiates and enters into status of forces agreements (SOFAs) governing the treatment and disposition of U.S. armed forces stationed in other nations. The President may not, however, unilaterally conclude executive agreements on matters not within his constitutional authority.
. . .