Reading an interview of John Bolton by the le Figaro, You find a statement from him even put into the title by the editor: “Il est très probable que Trump quittera l’Otan s’il est réélu” – “It is very likely that Trump will leave NATO if he is re-elected”
Is this possible?
Regardless of Trump, it is a very interesting question if the US President can really withdraw his/her country from an international organization. Based on the US Constitution, in order to ratify an international treaty, he/she needs the support of two-third of the US Senate: there is no specific rule about this, but I think it would be illogical if he/she could just decide on his/her own to terminate one. As by that way, the President would gain legislative power – as the US Constitution immediately treats the text of ratified international treaties as federal law, if the President could decide to terminate those without the Senate, he/she would essentially change the text of federal laws.
The actual practice has been constant until the twentieth century, until when all treaty terminations have been backed/initiated by the Congress and the Senate accordingly. But after that a new practice have emerged, and the President has started to terminate treaties with his unilateral authority, which has become standard practice, not often challenged by the legislator. Not until 1978, the so-called Goldwater v. Carter case, where the decision of President Jimmy Carter (terminating a mutual defense treaty with the government of Taiwan, as part of the US’ recognition of the government of China) was challenged in front of the US Supreme Court. Unfortunately it has not been dealing with the merits of the constitutional question, some of the justices qualifying it a “nonjusticiable political question”. This position has not changed ever since.
Concluding, Trump could do it, but it is fair to say that a presidential decision of such gravity (taking the US out of NATO) would surely see strong opposition and a possible new round in front of the Supreme Court. Never any terminations before has even come close to the importance of this, so the Court could use this case to finally give a conclusive answer, which – according to my own opinion – should be the one two paragraphs above.
But let’s hope we never have to see it.