Clinton interprets the act as unconstitutional and advisory in nature because it would direct the president in matters of foreign policy, despite his agreeing with the goal.
So there is some precedent for jealously guarding "foreign policy" that Trump could point to if he realizes it exists.
April 16, 2025 at 10:45 PM
Clinton interprets the act as unconstitutional and advisory in nature because it would direct the president in matters of foreign policy, despite his agreeing with the goal.
So there is some precedent for jealously guarding "foreign policy" that Trump could point to if he realizes it exists.