No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Suit by Congressmen Regarding Withdrawal from ABM Treaty
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2017
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of International Law 2003
References
1 Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, May 26,1972, U.S.-USSR, 23 UST 3435 [hereinafter ABM Treaty]. The ABM Treaty limited both sides to two antiballistic missile interceptor sites. A1974 Protocol to the ABM Treaty limited both sides to just one antiballistic missile site, each containing no more than one hundred interceptors. Protocol to the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems, July 3, 1974, U.S.-USSR, 27 UST 1645.
2 See Remarks Announcing the United States Withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, 37 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1783 (Dec. 13,2001); LaFraniere, Sharon, Putin Calls ABM Move ‘Mistaken’; Critics Say Decision Humiliates Russia, Wash. Post, Dec. 14, 2001, at A40 Google Scholar.
3 See Milbank, Dana, U.S. Withdraws from Missile Treaty, Wash. Post, June 14, 2002, at A28 Google Scholar.
4 Plaintiffs Complaint at 10, Kucinich v. Bush, 2002 WL 31889966 (D.D.C. Dec. 30, 2002) (No. 02-1137 (JDB) ECF).
5 Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment at 34-35, 38-39, Kucinich v. Bush.
6 2002 WL 31889966 (D.D.C. Dec. 30, 2002).