Issued 2018-07-20 by Donald J. Trump
AI-generated summary explaining what this action does, who it affects, and why it matters
President Trump signed into law the North Korean Human Rights Reauthorization Act of 2017, legislation intended to promote human rights and freedom in North Korea. At the same time he signed it, he issued a statement expressing concerns about certain provisions in the law. Specifically, he objected to sections that he believes could be interpreted as requiring him to adopt particular foreign policies or directing him how to negotiate with foreign governments and international organizations.
In his statement, the President directed his administration to implement these provisions in a way that aligns with what he considers the President's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs. This means the administration may interpret or apply these sections differently than Congress might have intended when writing the law.
This type of presidential statement issued alongside a new law is called a signing statement. The constitutional appropriateness of using such statements to effectively modify how laws are enforced has been debated, with some arguing it undermines Congress's lawmaking power while others maintain presidents have a duty to identify constitutional concerns with legislation they sign.
AI-generated summary for educational purposes
How this action fits (or doesn't) within Article II authority and existing law
This signing statement ("Statement on Signing the North Korean Human Rights Reauthorization Act of 2017") was issued alongside a bill the President signed into law. The President's stated concerns: "human rights and freedom in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea." Signing statements allow presidents to express constitutional or policy objections to specific provisions of legislation they have just signed. Their legal weight and constitutional propriety have been contested since the practice became common in the 1980s.
Critics — including the American Bar Association — argue that using signing statements to announce an intent to not enforce portions of a law effectively creates a line-item veto, which the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in Clinton v. City of New York (1998). Defenders argue presidents have a duty to identify constitutional concerns and that signing statements are a legitimate form of executive interpretation. The constitutional propriety depends on whether this specific statement announces non-enforcement or merely records the President's views.
Administration of Donald J. Trump, 2018 Statement on Signing the North Korean Human Rights Reauthorization Act of 2017 July 20, 2018 Today, I have signed into law H.R. 2061, the "North Korean Human Rights Reauthorization Act of 2017". This legislation is intended to promote human rights and freedom in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Like its predecessor, however, H.R. 2061 contains a number of provisions, including sections 5(3), 7(c), 7(d), and 8(a)(2), that could be read to require the President to adopt a particular foreign policy of the United States or to direct negotiations with foreign governments and international organizations. (See Statement on Signing the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004.) Accordingly, I am directing my Administration to implement these provisions in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs. D ONALD J. T RUMP The White House, July 20, 2018. N OTE : H.R. 2061, approved July 20, was assigned Public Law No. 115–198. Categories: Bill Signings and Vetoes : North Korean Human Rights