President Biden's Commencement Speech at Morehouse Proving Problematic
NYPD Chief of Patrol Rebuts AOC's Anti-Cop Rant - Twitter (X) Loves It
Um, WOW: Resurfaced Kirstie Alley Interview About Parents' Car Accident Has X Asking...
If Students Had Pro-Israel Encampments, Would You Still Support the Police?
Satire Site 'The Onion' Has New Ownership Well Qualified to Publish Fake News
Rep. Ilhan Omar and Her Homeless, Starving Daughter Meet With Columbia Pro-Hamas Mob
Iran’s Supreme Leader Issues Statement of Support for Pro-Hamas Protesters
Terrorists Attack Joe Biden's Temporary Pier to Bring Aid to Palestinians
WATCH: Jewish NYU Professor SMACKS DOWN Campus Protest Hypocrisy
Justice Brett Kavanaugh Asks Why Barack Obama Was Never Prosecuted
OOF: Axios Poll Shows Majority of Americans (42% of Democrats!) Support Trump's Immigratio...
USC Cancels Main Graduation Ceremony Citing Safety Concerns in the Wake of Pro-Palestine...
President Biden Tells Police Officers He Remembers When He Got 'That' Phone Call
TikTok Owner Says They Would Rather Shut Down the Controversial App Than Sell...
BAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA: Sprinkler System Gives Harvard Protesters a Much-Needed Bath

Does president's own 2012 legislation make Iran deal a violation of federal law? Does it matter?

Matt Drudge has broken out the siren for this one, although we’re careful now not to associate “violation of federal law” with any sort of punishment or consequences.

Advertisement

Fox News’ James Rosen reports tonight that “some senior U.S. officials involved in the implementation of the Iran nuclear deal” have determined that the deal violates federal law, in part because of legislation that President Obama himself signed into law in 2012.

Rosen writes:

At issue is a passage tucked away in ancillary paperwork attached to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, as the Iran nuclear deal is formally known. Specifically, Section 5.1.2 of Annex II provides that in exchange for Iranian compliance with the terms of the deal, the U.S. “shall…license non-U.S. entities that are owned or controlled by a U.S. person to engage in activities with Iran that are consistent with this JCPOA.”

In short, this means that foreign subsidiaries of U.S. parent companies will, under certain conditions, be allowed to do business with Iran. The problem is that the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act (ITRA), signed into law by President Obama in August 2012, was explicit in closing the so-called “foreign sub” loophole.

Advertisement

Legal analysts say the Iran deal could be in trouble in court, as it is not a treaty but an “executive agreement” that received no vote of ratification from Congress.

RedState’s Joe Cunningham isn’t expecting much to transpire either. He writes that the White House “know what they are doing is not at all legal, and they don’t care …. The White House won’t alter its course, and things will be able to go ahead without prosecution because this administration believes more in itself than it does actual law.”

Advertisement

https://twitter.com/gojangirl/status/652254791930900480

Yes. Further negotiations with the United States are banned. And why not? Iran got everything it wanted and more.

* * *

Related:

The White House now admits there are ‘side deals’ with Iran and the IAEA, but Congress still can’t see them

Clintonian: It all depends on what the definition of ‘secret’ or ‘side’ deal is?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement