The President is responsible for the appointment of candidates for the positions of head of government posts. At the beginning of his presidency, the President will generally appoint cabinet officials and secretaries and fill vacancies when needed. In addition, the President is responsible for appointing judges of the Federal Court of Justice and Supreme Court judges and electing the Supreme Justice. These appointments must be confirmed by the Senate. While the Speaker generally has broad appointment powers, there are some restrictions, subject to Senate approval. In the National Labor Relations Board v. SW General Inc. (2017), the Supreme Court stated that the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 [FVRA], which prohibits any appointee to fill a vacancy requiring the appointment of the President and the confirmation of the Senate, from performing this function as Commissioner, applies to all those acting under the FRAV. Compare Bradford C.
Clark, Domesticating Sole Executive Agreements, 93 Va. L. Rev. 1573, 1661 (2007) (arguing that the text and history of the Constitution support the position that treaties and executive agreements are not interchangeable, and also argue that the supreme clause should be read in order to avoid, in general, exclusive executive agreements being contrary to existing legislation); Laurence H. Tribe, Taking Text and Structure Seriously: Reflections on Free-Form Method in Constitutional Interpretation, 108 Harv. L. Rev. 1221, 1249-67 (1995) (on the grounds that the contractual clause is the exclusive means for Congress to approve important international agreements); John C. Yoo, Laws as Treaties?: The Constitutionality of Congressional Executive Agreements, 99 Me. L. Rev.
757, 852 (2001) (on the grounds that treaties are the constitutional form required for Congress to approve an international agreement on measures outside the constitutional powers of Congress, including human rights, political/military alliances and arms control issues, but are not necessary for agreements of measures within the competence of Congress, such as the International Trade Agreement. B). With third restatement, see 1, 303 n.8 (“Previously, it was argued that certain agreements could only be concluded in the form of contracts under the constitutional procedure. The scientific opinion rejected this view.” Henkin, supra note 22, to 217 (“Whatever its theoretical virtues, it is now widely accepted that the Executive Convention of Congress is available for general use, even for general use, and is a complete alternative to a contract.