Real bill currently in Congress  c/o  HR/119/3429

US-Japan-ROK Trilateral Cooperation Act

Policy area: International Affairs ▲ 87 days since action Sponsor: Ami Bera, CA-06, D → Congress.gov

Latest action (2026-06-09): Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Official summary

US-Japan-ROK Trilateral Cooperation Act This bill requires the Department of State to seek to enter negotiations with the governments of Japan and South Korea with the goal of establishing regular trilateral meetings (referred to as the US-Japan-ROK Inter-Parliamentary Dialogue) to facilitate closer cooperation on shared interests and values. The bill sets forth membership requirements for a group representing the United States in such meetings. The group must be composed of not more than eight Members of Congress appointed by congressional leaders to serve for a term of two years. The bill also sets forth guidance and requirements for meeting frequency and location, group leadership, gifts and donations, expenditures, and reports.

The Framers

“Founders’ Verdict”

CONDITIONAL

Confidence 0.75

Synthesis

The bill is constitutional only if its provisions are strictly advisory and non-binding on the executive, preserving the President's exclusive authority over foreign negotiations and avoiding the creation of a permanent congressional diplomatic body that would violate the separation of powers.

Hamilton YES

This bill is a constitutionally sound exercise of the legislative power to provide for the common defence and to regulate foreign intercourse. The Congress has the express authority to declare war, raise and support armies, and provide for the calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions. Furthermore, the Treaty Clause (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) vests the President with the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate, which necessarily implies the authority to engage in diplomatic negotiations. The bill does…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11-16 Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 Federalist No. 75
Jefferson CONDITIONAL

The proposed bill's objective of fostering diplomatic dialogue through regular meetings with foreign nations falls within the treaty and foreign affairs powers granted to the federal government. However, the Constitution vests the treaty power in the President and Senate jointly (Article II, Section 2), and Congress may not entangle itself in the conduct of foreign negotiations in a manner that displaces the Executive's preeminent role. Moreover, the establishment of a permanent congressional delegation as a standing body, with fixed membership and expenditures, raises concerns under the Tenth…

Article II, Section 2 Amendment X
Madison NO

This bill unconstitutionally encroaches upon the executive branch's exclusive authority over foreign diplomacy and the appointment of officers of the United States. The Constitution vests the President with the power to make treaties and appoint ambassadors, and to conduct the nation's foreign relations as the sole organ of the federal government in that sphere. By mandating that the Department of State seek negotiations and by establishing a congressional delegation to represent the United States in a formal inter-parliamentary dialogue, the bill attempts to assign diplomatic functions to Mem…

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 Article II, Section 3 Federalist No. 51 Federalist No. 75
Marshall YES

The Constitution vests in Congress the power to regulate foreign commerce and to provide for the common defense and general welfare. The bill merely authorizes the Department of State to enter negotiations and establishes a framework for inter-parliamentary dialogue, which is a proper exercise of the legislative power to advise and consent on treaties and to conduct foreign affairs. It does not exceed the enumerated powers of Congress, nor does it infringe upon the executive's exclusive authority to conduct diplomacy, as it only sets guidelines for congressional participation. The necessary an…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (Commerce Clause) Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 (Necessary and Proper Clause) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

What should pass

“AI Consensus Solution”

No solution yet

Daily synthesis runs at 06:00 UTC. This bill's consensus draft will appear on the next pass.

← Back to the Republic