Talk:United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.

Untitled
To whoever wrote this: Thank you! orporg

No Legal Import
In 2007, Charlie Savage wrote in Takeover that Sutherland's statement about the "plenary and exclusive power of the President as the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations" was dicta, or an aside to the opinion itself, and therefore has no legal weight. Many supporters of the "unitary executive theory" of government cite Sutherland's statement to argue that the president has powers which, in fact, he does not have. Moreover, Savage wrote, Sutherland misquoted his original source, the Supreme Court's first Chief Justice, John Marshall, who as a House member argued that the president has the duty to carry out the nation's treaty obligations and is the exclusive channel for diplomatic communications. Marshall did not argue that the legislative or judicial branches had no authority over foreign policy, and never espoused that argument once ascending to the high court. This comes from Savage's book, p. 141, and itself is sourced from Louis Fisher, "The 'Sole Organ' Doctrine," Studies on Presidential Power in Foreign Relations, The Law Library of Congress, 8/28/2006.

I think this is worth noting. 98.67.84.49 (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)Max Black

Wrong Facts
The Curtiss Wright had been implicated not in sales of airplanes but 15 machine guns. I can reference law books and Oyez project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.135.25.71 (talk) 18:58, 27 January 2015 (UTC)