Bond v. United States: Concurring in the Judgment
Cato Supreme Court Review, pp. 285-306, 2014
23 Pages Posted: 24 Sep 2014
Date Written: 2014
Bond v. United States presented the deep constitutional question of whether a treaty can increase the legislative power of Congress. Unfortunately, a majority of the Court managed to sidestep the constitutional issue by dodgy statutory interpretation. But the other three Justices — Scalia, Thomas, and Alito — all wrote important concurrences in the judgment, grappling with the constitutional issues presented. In particular, Justice Scalia’s opinion (joined by Justice Thomas), is a masterpiece, eloquently demonstrating that Missouri v. Holland is wrong and should be overruled: a treaty cannot increase the legislative power of Congress.
Keywords: constitutional law, Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation Act, Congress, statutory interpretation, Supreme Court
JEL Classification: K10, K14, K19, K30, K39
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation