Final answer:
Executive agreements are an alternative to treaties and can be enacted solely by the president, which streamlines foreign policy decisions but also has the potential for presidential overreach. The Case Act requires that Congress be informed about an executive agreement within 60 days, aiming to maintain checks on executive power. The War Powers Resolution gave presidents the ability to deploy troops for sixty days without immediate congressional approval.
Step-by-step explanation:
Executive agreements serve as an expedient alternative for U.S. presidents to treaties when engaging in international relations. Unlike treaties, which require a two-thirds approval from the Senate, executive agreements can be negotiated and approved solely by the president, especially in the contexts where such agreements do not require Senate approval and do not conflict with U.S. domestic law. This pathway often allows for a quicker and less formal set of negotiations and can be valuable in addressing the rapid pace of modern foreign policies. Executive agreements range from significant ones like NAFTA, which do involve legislative approval, to less controversial and mundane agreements that rarely make headlines.
In legal terms, following the Supreme Court case United States v. Pink, executive agreements have been recognized as holding the same legal status as treaties as long as they do not alter federal law. Also, the Case Act was implemented to prevent potential presidential overreach by mandating that Congress must be informed of any such agreements within 60 days of their creation.
When handling the concept of executive agreements, it's crucial to consider their efficiency and their potential for presidential overreach. Critics argue this method circumvents the Senate, while proponents see it as streamlining the foreign policy process. The War Powers Resolution of 1973, although aimed at restricting executive power in military engagements, inadvertently granted presidents the ability to commit troops for sixty days without congressional approval, underscoring the nuanced balance of power between the executive and legislative branches in foreign policy affairs.