In the United States, executive agreements are binding at the international level when negotiated and concluded under the authority of the President on foreign policy, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces or from a previous congressional record. For example, the President, as Commander-in-Chief, negotiates and concludes Armed Forces Agreements (SOFAs) that govern the treatment and disposition of U.S. forces deployed in other nations. However, the President cannot unilaterally enter into executive agreements on matters that are not in his constitutional jurisdiction. In such cases, an agreement should take the form of an agreement between Congress and the executive branch or a contract with the Council and the approval of the Senate.  See z.B. Louis Henkin, U.S. Ratification of Human Rights Treatys: The Ghost of Senator Bricker, 89 Am. J. Int`l L. 341, 343-44 (1995) (on the grounds that the United States is able to fully discharge its obligations under certain human rights instruments under current domestic law, treaties are unnecessary and inconsistent with their purpose); Fourth restatment: design 2, top note 28, 105 cmt.
3 (“[R]eservations are generally not permitted by international law if they are “incompatible with the purpose and purpose of the treaty”. (Cite the Vienna Convention, see 13, art. 19 (c)). Executive agreements are often used to circumvent the requirements of national constitutions for treaty ratification. Many nations that are republics with written constitutions have constitutional rules on treaty ratification. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is based on executive agreements. Executive agreement, an agreement between the United States and a foreign government that is less formal than a treaty and is not subject to the constitutional requirement for ratification by two-thirds of the U.S. Senate.
In the United States, executive agreements are made exclusively by the President of the United States. They are one of three mechanisms through which the United States makes binding international commitments. Some authors view executive agreements as treaties of international law because they bind both the United States and another sovereign state.