The dualist position is exemplified by the
United Kingdom, where treaty-making is considered to be the exclusive competence of "
Her Majesty's Government" (the executive). All treaties must be incorporated if they are to have any effect on domestic legislation. To do otherwise would violate the doctrine of the
sovereignty of Parliament, which reserves legislative primacy to the British parliament. However, treaties may have
interpretative value, and judges consider that Parliament, in the absence of clear contrary intention, did not intend for an Act to conflict with a ratified treaty. The position of the
United States is intermediate to the two extremes described above. The
Supremacy Clause (VI.2) of the
United States Constitution states that "all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land." However, the term "treaty" has a more restricted sense in
American law than in international law. Of the more than 16,000 international agreements entered into by the United States between 1946 and 1999, only 912 were ratified by the required two thirds of the
US Senate of the
Treaty Clause of the Constitution. The
US Supreme Court has also limited the direct effect of ratified treaties, notably in the case of
Medellín v. Texas (2008). Almost all treaties must be incorporated into federal law by both chambers of the
US Congress to have effect. ==References==