Skip to main content
Law

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

9
  • Interesting premise re: treaty-mandated classification. Can you provide more specifics? Commented Sep 16, 2022 at 0:14
  • Information sharing is not generally done with actual treaties. There might be agreements, but those agreements are normally based on trust and not considered legally binding. Commented Sep 16, 2022 at 0:30
  • @bdb484 Hard when such treaties normally contain this clause: "It will be contrary to this agreement to reveal its existence to any third party whatever." Commented Sep 16, 2022 at 1:13
  • @cpast not necessarily like. Bilateral treaties are, in fact, reached between not the executive branches, but the legislative powers of states, I would say, more often than not. Why could those not include confidentiality clauses? Unfortunately, they do, and do not so seldom. Those really are not within the prerogatives of executive to disclose it would need the consent of the other party. The same situation is abused by Hungary in its China railway construction deals, for e.g.. Commented Sep 16, 2022 at 1:31
  • Are you saying that Trump may argue that the secret documents found during the search of his house were, in fact, declassified by him long ago? Commented Sep 16, 2022 at 6:26