We Have Every Right to Be Furious About ACTA eff.org

excerpt
In the U.S., there are growing concerns about the constitutionality of negotiating ACTA as a “sole executive agreement”.  This is not just a semantic argument. If ACTA were categorized as a treaty, it would have to be ratified by the Senate. But the USTR and the Administration have consistently maintained that ACTA is a sole executive agreement negotiated under the President’s power. On that theory, it does not need Congressional approval and thus ACTA already became binding on the US government when Ambassador Ron Kirk signed it last October.
But leading US Constitutional Scholars disagree. Professors Jack Goldsmith and Larry Lessig, questioned the Constitutionality of the executive agreement classification in 2010:
The president has no independent constitutional authority over intellectual property or communications policy, and there is no long historical practice of making sole executive agreements in this area. To the contrary, the Constitution gives primary authority over these matters to Congress, which is charged with making laws that regulate foreign commerce and intellectual property.2

State Of Things NC

Talking About Politics

NYT > The Upshot

Guernica / Art & Politics

Carolina Journal

Basketball, Lacrosse, etc.

Reason Magazine

BlueNC

Republic Report

SCOTUSblog

The Page

Politico 10

CommonBlog

Roll Call Special Sections

TED Blog

ProPublica: Articles and Investigations

The Progressive Pulse

Huffington Post

Newser Politics

Politico Playbook

Project Syndicate

Xconomy

Politics Daily

AL JAZEERA ENGLISH (AJE)

White House

Politico Huddle

POLITICO

Episcopal Cafe