Hacker News Reader

Comment by caseysoftware | Hacker News Reader

This is an interesting one..

Negotiating treaties is the exclusive authority of POTUS but approving them is the US Senate's job.

"Committing to work together" is probably vague enough that it's not meaningful but "signed an economic partnership" with a foreign ambassador is pretty explicit.

I wonder how they're going to make this one work.

View on HN

It's actually a crime for unauthorized officials to negotiate with countries directly to influence disputes, under the Logan act.

Going backdoor with Denmark to make "unrelated agreements" (wink-wink) at the same time as the Greenland dispute is just a cheap way to get around that.

* Note that this doesn't mean I agree with the Logan act, but it's pretty obvious what is happening.

It's also a crime for people to pretend to be electors and submit fraudulent paperwork.

Not in this case, since the US hasn't sanctioned Denmark. Trump's rage bleating on Truth Social doesn't constitute official policy. Now, if restrictions on doing business with Denmark were published in the Federal Register, it could get complicated.

I admit, other than in name, I'm not familiar with the Logan Act. Where does it require sanctions or similar?

There isn't a dispute is there isn't any sort of official government publication about it. Late night rants on Truth Social don't meet that standard.

It's also something that wont be prosecuted under the current admnistration, given a lot of the Trump family have acted in the role of foreign diplomats despite not holding official positions. Prosecuting the states for this would open equal scrutiny for them.

California set this precedent roughly a decade ago [0] with no challenge. It will stand.

Subnational diplomacy is the norm in most federations, hence why GOP led Iowa [1] and Montana [2] lobbied in favor of India with Trump leading to the current trade deal [3].

[0] - https://calmatters.org/environment/2017/11/gov-jerry-brown-t...

[1] - https://governor.iowa.gov/press-release/2025-09-07/gov-reyno...

[2] - https://www.daines.senate.gov/2026/01/20/daines-travels-to-i...

[3] - https://www.reuters.com/world/india/us-trade-chief-says-indi...

It looks like California showed up and participated in conversations, didn't sign anything. Montana appears to have lobbied, again not signing anything.

Iowa is the exception and I'd be curious what gave them the authority and how much, why it wasn't challenged last fall, and if Massachusettes meets the same circumstances.

Conversations are conversations, and that's my point. This is the "MoU"fication of the US, and honestly, it's not a bad thing.

Reincentivizing states to compete with each other for FDI is not a bad policy. If TX and CA talk with energy speicifc SWFs and go on roadshows abroad, there's nothing wrong with that.

It lights a fire under other state legislator asses.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com