No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 March 2017
1 22 C.F.R., ch. I, pts. 120–30 (2010).
2 S. Exec. Rep. NO. 111 , Defense Trade Cooperation Treaties with the United Kingdom and Australia 1 (Sept. 24, 2010)Google Scholar (Senate Foreign Relations Committee), at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_reports&docid=f:er005.pdf.
3 Crook, John R., Contemporary Practice of the United States, 102 AJIL 373 (2008)Google Scholar; see S. Exec. Rep. NO. 111, at 4.
4 S. Exec. Rep. N O . 111 , at 16.
5 But see Medellín v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491, 514 (2008)Google Scholar (“Given our obligation to interpret treaty provisions to determine whether they are self-executing, we have to confess that we do think it rather important to look to the treaty language to see what it has to say about the issue. That is after all what the Senate looks to in deciding whether to approve the treaty.”).
6 S. Exec. Rep. No. 111, at 11–12.
7 Id. at 14.
8 Id. at 16. The full texts of the resolutions of advice and consent are at 156 Cong. Rec. S7442–46 (daily ed. Sept. 24, 2010).
9 S. Exec. Rep. NO. 111–5, at 22.
10 U.S. Dep’t of State Press Release No. 2010/1377, U.S. Defense Trade Cooperation Treaties with the United Kingdom and Australia (Sept. 30, 2010), at http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/09/148476.htm.
11 U.S. Dep’t of State Press Release No. 2010/1378, Fact Sheet: U.S. Defense Trade Cooperation Treaties with the United Kingdom and Australia (Sept. 30, 2010), at http://www.state.gOv/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/09/148478.htm.