A. This Is An Agreement Between The President And The Head Of Another Sovereign State

The Seminole Court considered it important to determine what constitutional authority was exercised by the adoption of the Indian Gaming Law. The Court found that the power exercised was Indian trade clause 128, which is in Section I. In Pennsylvania v. Union Gas,129, the Tribunal had previously held that commercial power as a power of the whole was so broad that it necessarily required the ability to lift the sovereign immunity of the state. However, in Seminole, the Court struck down Union Gas and found that, since the Eleventh Amendment was ratified after the adoption of the Constitution and Article I, it constituted a restriction on the power of Congress to lift the sovereign immunity of a state under that section. However, the Court indicated that Congress could overturn the state`s sovereignty under the Fourteenth Amendment. Although the logic behind this distinction is ambiguous130 means that, in many cases, the complainant states are trying to obtain a fourteenth basic amendment of federal statutes to defeat an eleventh amendment defense. The implementation of executive agreements increased considerably after 1939. Prior to 1940, the U.S. Senate had ratified 800 treaties and presidents had concluded 1,200 executive agreements; From 1940 to 1989, during World War II and the Cold War, presidents signed nearly 800 treaties, but concluded more than 13,000 executive treaties.

A presidential system is a system of government in which an executive is led by a president who acts both as head of state and as head of government. In such a system, this branch is separate from the legislator, of which he is not competent and which he cannot refuse under normal circumstances. Presidential systems are a remarkable feature of constitutions in America, including constitutions in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Mexico and Venezuela; This is generally attributed to the strong influence of the United States in the region, as the U.S. Constitution served as an inspiration and model for the Latin American wars of independence in the early 19th century. Justice Roberts` opinion at the NFIB held that, in the case of the condition of funding for the existing program, which depends on the adoption of a „new and independent“ program, the amount of federal funds at issue cannot constitute a substantial portion of the state budget or that its withdrawal after the tenth amendment is perceived as an unconstitutional constraint. Roberts J.A. did not set a standard for determining the amount of the penalty or the distinguishing factors required for such an analysis. However, he concluded that the withdrawal of federal funds, which represented 10% of the state`s average budget, was a „gun to the head“ and a form of „economic damage“. 152 In the summer of 1787, delegates to the Constitutional Convention debated the structure and responsibilities of a new legislative body. One of the questions they asked was whether the power of contracting lies within the legislative or executive department? Depending on the statutes of the federal government, a contract could be concluded with the agreement of nine of the thirteen states or two-thirds. Some delegates, such as Charles Pinckney of South Carolina, insisted that the Senate, where each state is represented on an equal footing, should have exclusive power to enter into contracts. Alexander Hamilton argued that the executive should exercise powers over external relations and should therefore have the power to enter into contracts „with the Council and the approval of the Senate.“ In the end, Hamilton`s argument proved persuasive.

Although the powers of the federal government are limited to those mentioned in Constitution 7, they have been interpreted broadly to create a great potential overlap with the authority of the state.