The greatest source of executive agreements were laws that had the power to enter into reciprocal trade agreements with other nations.447 Such agreements, in the form of treaties that provided for the reciprocal reduction of tariffs submitted to Congress, were often concluded.448 But beginning with the Tariff Act of 1890, Congress began to insert provisions empowering the executive to negotiate reciprocity. without the need for subsequent laws. ve action. Authority was expanded in successive statutes.450 Then, in the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934,451 Congress authorized the president to enter into agreements with other nations on the reduction of tariffs and other barriers to international trade, and to implement the reductions by proclamation.452 The second opportunity is for presidents to unilaterally withdraw from treaties. while the withdrawal of executive agreements from Congress requires the involvement of Congress. Footnote 41 This would allow presidents to easily break their promise, even after a treaty has gone through the process of deliberation and approval. Similarly, Hathaway`s analysis is purely descriptive and unable to empirically examine why contracts are more or less common in certain areas. It is therefore impossible to determine whether the historical conventions motivate the application of the Treaty in various thematic areas or whether other considerations may be at stake. Dictum in Garamendi recognizes some of the questions that can be raised about Zschernig. Here, too, the results repeatedly show that agreements concluded as treaties outlive those concluded as executive agreements. Thus, the results do not depend on the specific peculiarities of the cox model, but are also robust compared to other specifications of the model.

.