US Pulling Out of Climate Treaty: Experts Weigh in on Legality and Implications
The Trump administration's decision to withdraw the US from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has sparked debate among experts about its legality. The move, announced in a presidential memorandum, marks the first time any country has exited the agreement.
Harold Hongju Koh, a former head lawyer for the US state department, says that President Trump does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty. "In my legal opinion, he does not have the authority," Koh told the Guardian.
The UNFCCC requires one year's notice for withdrawal, but Trump's memo did not specify whether the administration will submit a formal notice of termination to the UN. This has raised questions about the legitimacy of the move.
Michael Gerrard, a climate law expert at Columbia University, notes that the US entered the UNFCCC with Senate approval in 1992 and therefore "there is an open question" about whether Trump can unilaterally exit the agreement. Gerrard argues that since the Paris climate agreement was never ratified by the US Senate, it does not require Senate approval for withdrawal.
However, Curtis Bradley, a University of Chicago law school professor, suggests that presidents have traditionally exercised this power without congressional input. "In practice, presidents have long asserted the authority to withdraw the United States from treaties and other international agreements without seeking the approval of either the Senate or Congress," he said.
Others, including Jean Galbraith, an international law expert at the University of Pennsylvania Carey law school, argue that the issue is complex and depends on interpretation. "When you think about withdrawal, you can think about what exactly is the president doing? Are they just ratcheting back that last step of ratification?" she asked.
The implications of Trump's move are far-reaching, with many experts warning of irreparable damage to international credibility and a failure to address the pressing issue of climate change. "Climate action won't stop because of the latest US treaty withdrawal, either in the US or globally," said Sue Biniaz, former principal deputy special envoy for climate at the state department.
The move has also sparked criticism from lawmakers, including Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who describes it as "not just corrupt, it's illegal". Whitehouse believes that once a treaty is ratified by the Senate, only the Senate can withdraw from it.
As the world watches the US pull out of the UNFCCC, experts and lawmakers are left wondering about the long-term implications of this move. Will the US be able to rejoin the agreement? Can the country's climate credibility be restored?
One thing is certain: Trump's decision has sent a clear signal that the US is no longer a reliable partner for international commitments on climate change. As Galbraith notes, "it's a further signal of real antipathy to fixing what is a real and increasingly dire problem."
The Trump administration's decision to withdraw the US from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has sparked debate among experts about its legality. The move, announced in a presidential memorandum, marks the first time any country has exited the agreement.
Harold Hongju Koh, a former head lawyer for the US state department, says that President Trump does not have the authority to unilaterally withdraw from the treaty. "In my legal opinion, he does not have the authority," Koh told the Guardian.
The UNFCCC requires one year's notice for withdrawal, but Trump's memo did not specify whether the administration will submit a formal notice of termination to the UN. This has raised questions about the legitimacy of the move.
Michael Gerrard, a climate law expert at Columbia University, notes that the US entered the UNFCCC with Senate approval in 1992 and therefore "there is an open question" about whether Trump can unilaterally exit the agreement. Gerrard argues that since the Paris climate agreement was never ratified by the US Senate, it does not require Senate approval for withdrawal.
However, Curtis Bradley, a University of Chicago law school professor, suggests that presidents have traditionally exercised this power without congressional input. "In practice, presidents have long asserted the authority to withdraw the United States from treaties and other international agreements without seeking the approval of either the Senate or Congress," he said.
Others, including Jean Galbraith, an international law expert at the University of Pennsylvania Carey law school, argue that the issue is complex and depends on interpretation. "When you think about withdrawal, you can think about what exactly is the president doing? Are they just ratcheting back that last step of ratification?" she asked.
The implications of Trump's move are far-reaching, with many experts warning of irreparable damage to international credibility and a failure to address the pressing issue of climate change. "Climate action won't stop because of the latest US treaty withdrawal, either in the US or globally," said Sue Biniaz, former principal deputy special envoy for climate at the state department.
The move has also sparked criticism from lawmakers, including Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who describes it as "not just corrupt, it's illegal". Whitehouse believes that once a treaty is ratified by the Senate, only the Senate can withdraw from it.
As the world watches the US pull out of the UNFCCC, experts and lawmakers are left wondering about the long-term implications of this move. Will the US be able to rejoin the agreement? Can the country's climate credibility be restored?
One thing is certain: Trump's decision has sent a clear signal that the US is no longer a reliable partner for international commitments on climate change. As Galbraith notes, "it's a further signal of real antipathy to fixing what is a real and increasingly dire problem."
. If we can't even commit to one treaty, how are we gonna make a difference on climate change? I mean, I remember when we used to care about the environment, back in my day... 
We had real leaders who actually listened to science and took action. Now it's all about politics and personal agendas 
. The US is basically saying "hey, we're good" just 'cause they don't like something they can't change their mind 
. It's not just about Trump, it's about the whole system 
. We need to hold our leaders accountable and make sure they're doing what's best for the planet 
. This is a dark day for climate action 
. I mean, I knew the US was having some issues with climate change, but pulling out of an international treaty that they signed up for in 1992? It's just not right 
.
. But what really bothers me is the implications for climate change 
.
. We need to work together if we're going to solve this problem 
. And I have to say, it's really frustrating that lawmakers like Senator Sheldon Whitehouse are calling out Trump for doing something he can't even do without Senate approval 
.
. We need countries working together to solve this problem, not pulling away from it 
. Anyways, it's gonna take some time to see how this plays out internationally 
. Guess we'll just have to wait and see if the US can still make an impact on climate change despite this move 
US is outta all treaties now? experts are like "hold up buddy" and senate approval is still a thing 
i'm not gonna get into the whole treaty vs agreement debate but the impact on climate change is def a major red flag 
They're gonna leave the world high and dry on climate change. I'm not a lawyer or anything, but even I know that's a huge deal. They say they don't have to follow the rules 'cause they just did it themselves, but trust me, there are going to be some serious repercussions for this move. And what about all those scientists who were counting on us to take action? This is like pulling the plug on a sinking ship 
. I mean, we know the US Senate approved the treaty back in 1992, and now they're just going to ignore that? It doesn't add up.
. Transparency would be a great place to start, don't you think?
. It's like he's not taking the whole climate thing seriously at all 
. I mean, think about it, other countries are already counting on us to be part of this treaty, and now we're just... out? 
It's not just about climate change either, it's about what our country is showing the world. We need to show that we care about global issues and work together on them 
. If the US can just pull out of this treaty without following the rules, it sets a terrible precedent for other countries to follow suit too. I mean, what's next? Will we just abandon all international agreements and do whatever we want? It's not okay that Trump is doing this behind our backs 
... but also sad because I know it's going to affect a lot of people around the world who are counting on us to lead on climate change. We need to do better, America 
. The whole "irreparable damage" thing is just overhyped drama from the other side of the aisle...
. The UNFCCC requires one year's notice and Trump's memo didn't even specify if they're submitting a formal notice 
... what are they trying to hide? 
And now everyone's all like "oh, but it says in the treaty that only the Senate can withdraw"... yeah, sure, let's review the fine print again 
this is a total disaster waiting to happen, like we're literally putting the planet in harm's way over some political point scoring... how can the US possibly expect to get its credibility back once it's pulled out of the climate treaty? 
. In terms of economic impact, a study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics found that the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement would result in a loss of around $1.8 billion in annual GDP 
. Meanwhile, a report by the World Bank estimates that climate change could cost the global economy up to 11% of its total economic output by 2100 
. Not to mention, a recent study published in Nature found that if the US were to withdraw from all international climate agreements, it would result in an additional 1.2°C of warming by 2050