>Did you know that the Supreme Court sets foreign policy?
No, the U.S. Supreme Court does not set foreign policy. That's a common misconception.Under the U.S. Constitution, primary responsibility for conducting and setting foreign policy rests with the political branches:The President (as the chief executive and commander-in-chief, with powers to negotiate treaties, receive ambassadors, and direct diplomacy — often described as the "sole organ" of the nation in international relations, per cases like United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp.).
Congress (through powers like declaring war, regulating foreign commerce, ratifying treaties, appropriating funds, and passing laws that shape international relations).
The Supreme Court plays a much more limited, secondary role. It typically defers to the executive and legislative branches in foreign affairs matters, often treating many issues as "political questions" that are non-justiciable (meaning the Court avoids deciding them to prevent intruding on the other branches' domains).Key points from established legal principles and Court precedents:The Court has historically upheld broad presidential authority in foreign relations (e.g., Missouri v. Holland on treaty supremacy over state law, or reinforcing executive primacy in cases involving arms embargoes or international agreements).
It steps in mainly to resolve constitutional disputes, interpret treaties/laws in litigation, strike down state actions that interfere with federal foreign policy (via preemption or the foreign affairs power being exclusive to the federal government), or occasionally check executive overreach when it violates individual rights or clear statutory limits.
But the Court does not initiate, formulate, or direct foreign policy — that's not its job. It rules on cases that come before it, and even then, it often shows significant deference (e.g., avoiding direct second-guessing of diplomatic or military decisions).
Recent examples (like rulings on executive actions involving tariffs, immigration, or agency authority) show the Court can constrain specific policies when they exceed legal bounds, but it doesn't "set" the overall direction of U.S. foreign relations — that's still up to the President and Congress.In short: The Supreme Court interprets and enforces constitutional limits; it doesn't make foreign policy. The idea that it does is more myth than fact.
Boss has been talking about testing the limits/boundaries of the law,
I suspect this is far from over.
I'll gladly loan him my share to make america great.