If the president is waiting for an executive agreement, what kind of obligation does he impose on the United States? It is obvious that it can impose international obligations with potentially serious consequences, and that such obligations may persist longer is equally obvious.488 The nature of the national obligations imposed by executive agreements is not so obvious. Do contracts and executive agreements have the same domestic political effect?489 Contracts precede state law by applying the supremacy clause. While executive agreements made on the basis of congressional approval or a contractual obligation may also draw preemptive force from the supremacy clause, this textual basis for pre-purchase is likely lacking for executive agreements based solely on the president`s constitutional powers. For discussion of Congress` power to influence international treaties, international law, and the United States through its political powers, such as powers of surveillance and appropriation, see Henkin, Note 22, 81-82 above. However, international law does not affect the United States` obligation to comply with the provision of international law.129 When a treaty is ratified or an executive agreement is concluded, the United States acquires obligations under international obligations, regardless of its self-performance, and it can achieve its obligations unless implementing legislation is enacted.130 The Court adopted these principles five years later in the United States v. Pink,494 another case concerning the Litvinov mission and the recognition of the Soviet government. The question arose as to whether the United States was entitled to recover the assets of the New York branch of a Russian insurance company. The company argued that the Soviet government`s confiscation orders did not apply to its property in New York and could not be applied in accordance with the United States and New York Constitutions. The Court, which referred to Justice Douglas, dismissed those arguments.
An official statement by the Russian government itself settled the issue of the extraterritorial application of the Russian nationalization decree and was binding on U.S. courts. .