Which statement about treaties and executive agreements is true?

• A. Treaties Require Senate Ratification; Executive Agreements Do Not
• B. Executive Agreements Require Senate Ratification; Treaties Do Not
• C. Both Require Senate Ratification
• D. Neither Requires Senate Ratification

Answer: (A)

A key difference lies in how binding commitments with other countries are approved. Treaties are formal agreements negotiated by the President that only become binding after the Senate provides its advice and consent, usually with a two-thirds vote. This Senate requirement creates a constitutional check on international commitments.

Executive agreements, by contrast, do not go through the Senate. They can be made by the President on his own authority (often for routine matters or to implement actions already authorized by law or a treaty). Because they don’t require Senate approval, they can be arranged more quickly, but they tend to be more limited in duration and can be changed by future administrations or by acts of Congress.

If a treaty and an executive agreement ever conflict, the treaty—having been approved by the Senate and ratified—has greater authority under the Supremacy Clause.

So the accurate point is that treaties require Senate ratification, while executive agreements do not.