how does approving treaties balance power in the government

Holland, 252 U.S. at 43334 (The only question is whether [the Migratory Bird Treaty Act] is forbidden by some invisible radiation from the general terms of the Tenth Amendment.). Much of the Framers conception of government is owed to John Locke. The answer is the legislative branch can approve treaties to settle argument that are unconstitutional. art. In many ways, this arrangement would resemble the exception Professors Lawson and Seidman recognized regarding the Presidents Treaty Clause power,167 but it would just require Congress to act in conjunction with the President. 153. granted, 133 S. Ct. 978 (2013). 2. Three Branches of Government The Balance of Government (answers) The Balance of Government (answers) EXECUTIVE LEGISLATIVE Interprets _ laws _. Congress repealed the existing federal crime for using chemical weapons, which had defined chemical weapon to mean only a weapon that is designed or intended to cause widespread death or serious bodily injury through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or precursors of toxic or poisonous chemicals.60 Although that repealed definition was tailored to cover weapons of mass destruction, the new federal crime for using chemical weapons61 swept in many more substances. In Morrison, the Court invalidated part of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 on the basis that it would have usurped the states police power to implement criminal laws for wholly local conduct.180 The parallels between Morrison and Bond are striking. These and other treaties could be used to infringe on state sovereignty. Brief for the United States at 46, Bond v. United States, No. Their list of treaties in force defines a treaty as an international agreement made by the President of the 140. The Federalist No. v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566 (2012). 21. 24, 1963, 21 U.S.T. Nor does the Senates concurrence give any indication on how the House of Representatives would vote on proposed legislation. United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941). . When foreign policy issues take center stage in American politics, much of the focus tends to be on the executive branch. Id. vote in But Medelln involved an unusual fact pattern, and many questions remain about the scope of the federal governments treaty power. Besides this textual argument, there is an even more potent, structural argument for limits on Congresss power to implement treaties. The Constitution did not specify which branch should be the final arbiter of interpreting the Constitution, but that question has been settled for centuries the judicial branch has the power of judicial review under Marbury v. Madison.165 Judicial review should not apply only to those provisions of the Constitution favored by liberal academics. Opened for signature Jan. 13, 1993, 1974 U.N.T.S. (alteration in original) (quoting U.S. Const. . There is nothing in [Article VI, the Supremacy Clause,] which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution. !PLEASE HELP!!! Gary Lawson & Guy Seidman, The Jeffersonian Treaty Clause , 2006 U. Ill. L. Rev. 662, 736 (1836). at 434 (The whole foundation of the States rights is the presence within their jurisdiction of birds that yesterday had not arrived, tomorrow may be in another State and in a week a thousand miles away.). !PLEASE HELP!!! Consequently, when the federal government acts to create or implement a treaty, the Constitution requires that it do so pursuant to an enumerated power. You can specify conditions of storing and accessing cookies in your browser. The Framers divided governmental power in this manner because they had seen firsthand, from their experience with Britain, that concentrated authority predictably results in tyranny. 64 (John Jay), supra note 34, at 389. 40. At its core, the validity of Justice Holmess assertion in Missouri v. Holland, that Congress has plenary power to implement any treaty, turns on whether the federal government is one of limited, enumerated powers. First, Missouri v. Holland may have turned on the international character of the regulated subject matter that is, migratory birds. Impeach and try federal officers. I. But even before the Bill of Rights was created, the Constitution painstakingly enumerated the limited powers of the federal government on the basis that states would retain authority in a system of dual sovereignty. Others have tried to rehabilitate Missouri v. Hollands statement about the Necessary and Proper Clause with a competing structural argument.159 According to this argument, Congress must have the power to implement treaties, or else the President could enter into agreements with foreign nations and have no power to enforce these agreements.161 This result, though, is not absurd.162 As Rosenkranz highlighted, [a]ll non-self-executing treaties rely on the subsequent acquiescence of the House of Representatives something that our treaty partners can never be certain will be forthcoming. So when a foreign nation enters into a non-self-executing treaty with the United States, there is always a possibility that the treaty will not be implemented in the United States even if Congress had the authority under the Commerce Clause or another of its enumerated powers to pass the implementing statute. This site is using cookies under cookie policy . United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304, 319 (1936) (quoting 10 Annals of Cong. 116. ([T]here are situations in which American law tells you to look at international or foreign law.). . That said, Missouri v. Holland probably would have to be overruled if one believes that Congress lacked the Commerce Clause authority to implement the Treaty legislatively. Which branch has the power to approve treaties? v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566, 260103 (2013) (opinion of Roberts, C.J. The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention formally known as the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction53 is an international arms-control agreement. 1, 57. I, 8, art. in part, [as] an end in itself, to ensure that States function as political entities in their own right.88 Preserving the sovereign dignity of the states, though, was not the only reason to construct the federal government as one of enumerated powers. !PLEASE HELP! The Supreme Court in Medelln ruled that the President lacks constitutional authority to transform[] an international obligation arising from a non-self-executing treaty into domestic law.140 That responsibility, the Court held, falls to Congress.141 So we must consider whether there are any limits on Congresss ability to implement a treaty legislatively. Indeed, James Madison remarked that [t]he accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . for carrying into Execution . 45 (James Madison), supra note 34, at 289. (alteration in original) (quoting U.S. Const. After all, the President is the sole organ of the nation in its external relations, and its sole representative with foreign nations.115 Treaties are agreements like contracts, and all law students learn that contracts can be breached for many reasons, including efficiency. A 1907 memorandum approved by the Secretary of State stated that the limitations on the treaty power that necessitate legislative implementation may "be found in the The museum has justfinished a massive renovation of the museum and its exhibitions, the first major renovation in more than 20 years and the largest since the museum opened its doors in 1957. The President should not be able to make any treaty and Congress should not be able to implement any treaty in a way that displaces the sovereignty reserved to the states or to the people. 123. Such legislation would lack constitutional authority just like the Gun-Free Schools Zone Act invalidated in United States v. Lopez145 or the parts of the Violence Against Women Act struck down in Morrison.146 The Supreme Court has not had to clarify how closely the implementing legislation must fit with the treaty. 159. 18 U.S.C. 115. !PLEASE HELP!!! The United States Constitution provides that the president shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur (Article II, section 2). This simple, revolutionary idea shaped our nation. As with limits on the Presidents Treaty Clause power, the best arguments in favor of expansive congressional power to implement treaties involve wartime hypotheticals about peace-treaty concessions.166 Many of those concerns have already been discussed. In any event, there are good arguments to impose additional limits on Congresss power to implement treaties, and thus to reject Justice Holmess statement. 59. Id. !PLEASE HELP! Under this Essays framework, the President may have had the Treaty Clause power to make the Chemical Weapons Convention. (internal quotation marks omitted). 3 (John Jay), supra note 34, at 36. 249 (1989) (statement of J. Robert H. Bork) (describing the Ninth Amendment as an ink blot). !PLEASE HELP! . 150. But that question of prudence is different from the question of constitutional authority to make such a promise. 85. United States v. Bond, 681 F.3d 149, 151 (3d Cir. Jay understood that sometimes treaties must be made in secret, and the executive is the branch best positioned to keep negotiation of treaties secret.41 The President was therefore allowed to manage the business of intelligence in such manner as prudence may suggest by negotiating treaties, although the President must, in forming them, act by the advice and consent of the Senate.42 This, Jay realized, provides that our negotiations for treaties shall have every advantage which can be derived from talents, information, integrity, and deliberate investigations, on the one hand, and from secrecy and dispatch on the other.43 Hamilton, too, noted the comparative advantage that the President had over Congress in this regard: The qualities elsewhere detailed as indispensable in the management of foreign negotiations point out the executive as the most fit agent in those transactions . In 1988, the Court said it is well established that no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution.'122. art. 36(1)(b)). But the Necessary and Proper Clause combined with a treaty would not, under Rosenkranzs textual argument. We must jealously guard the separation of powers and state sovereignty if we are to preserve the constitutional structure our Framers gave us. Legislation that has nothing to do with a treatys subject matter would be neither necessary nor proper for carrying into Execution that treaty.144 For instance, the Chemical Weapons Convention would not give Congress the authority to enact legislation that has nothing to do with chemical weapons. Boos v. Barry, 485 U.S. 312, 324 (1988) (quoting Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 16 (1957)). So to test the limits on the Presidents power to make self-executing treaties, make one further assumption: that these hypothetical self-executing treaties cover some areas reserved for the states under our system of dual sovereignty. Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 43334 (1920). See Chemical Weapons Convention, supra note 53, art. 170. Individual liberty is also preserved by divided government: By denying any one government complete jurisdiction over all the concerns of public life, federalism protects the liberty of the individual from arbitrary power.89, So the people, acting as sovereign, only delegated to the federal government certain enumerated powers. But regardless of whether Congress had that authority, the President had the Treaty Clause power to make the treaty, even if he knew that the promise of U.S. participation could never be kept. . Can prove laws to be against the_Constitution_. It can exercise authority over no subjects, except those which have been delegated to it. 138. is one of limited powers. 28 U.S.C. The Court, however, has suggested that this may not be absurd. Id. Part III sets forth the central thesis of this Essay: courts should enforce constitutional limits on the Presidents power to make treaties and Congresss power to implement treaties by preventing either from infringing on the sovereignty reserved to the states. See id. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.84 States, moreover, retain a residuary and inviolable sovereignty.85 If there were any doubt about that proposition at the Founding, the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights clarified: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.86 Thus, [a]s every schoolchild learns, our Constitution establishes a system of dual sovereignty between the States and the Federal Government.87, The Supreme Court in the first Bond case, dealing with Bonds standing, expounded on these principles. But if Missouri v. Holland cannot be construed in that way, then it should be overruled in light of recent precedents from the Rehnquist Court and Roberts Court that police the boundaries of our constitutional structure. There are critical limits on the Presidents power to make treaties: (1) two-thirds of the Senate must approve of the treaty; (2) the treaty cannot violate an independent constitutional bar; and (3) the treaty cannot disrupt our constitutional structure by giving away sovereignty reserved to the states. 146. . 368 (ratified with reservations by the United States Senate on Apr. Medelln, 552 U.S. at 499 (alterations in original) (quoting Vienna Convention, supra note 19, art. 164. 2701 (West 2000 & Supp. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Executing the Treaty Power, 118 Harv. 142. The Senates veto over the Presidents power to make treaties shows that the treaty power was so substantial that it required further dilution among the branches. Legislative Check How does it balance power in the government? granted, 133 S. Ct. 978 (2013). Dual sovereignty therefore properly constrains the federal governments treaty power. Oversight and investigations. The Federalist No. Holden v. Joy, 84 U.S. (17 Wall.) In other words, the Tenth Amendment may prohibit the President from entering into treaties regulating wholly domestic conduct, but migratory birds by their nature are not necessarily a matter of pure internal concern. Congress has the power to: Make laws. !PLEASE HELP!!! 178. Treaty power refers to the Presidents constitutional authority to make treaties , with the advice and consent of the senate. 75 (Alexander Hamilton), supra note 34, at 365 (stating that treaties are not rules prescribed by the sovereign to the subject, but agreements between sovereign and sovereign). 80. Failing to judicially enforce the limits on federal government power, and the power held by individual branches, is tantamount to ignoring the sovereign will of the people who created government in the first place. at 152 (quoting Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 432 (1920)). I, 8, cl. (June 22, 2012), http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-06-22/opinions/35461763_1_royalty-payments-reagan-adviser-sea-treaty. Bond v. United States, which is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, provides a concrete set of facts showing how pervasive the treaty power could be without meaningful constitutional restraints. 98. Part II briefly lays out the facts in Bond v. United States, which raises many difficult issues that will be discussed in the remainder of the Essay. What powers does Congress have? Transit Auth., 469 U.S. 528, 55054 (1985) (discussing the role of constitutional structure and congressional legislation in preserving state interests). We must return to sovereignty to assess whether constitutional limits exist to restrain the federal governments power to create and implement treaties, and what those limits might be. . In 1836, the Court explained: The government of the United States . art. So when the President makes any promise that the United States will take future action that can only be undertaken by other governmental actors, the President never knows for certain whether the United States will follow through and honor this promise. Roguski said the pandemic treaty also would speed up the approval process for drugs and injectables, provide support for gain-of-function research, develop a Global Review Mechanism to oversee national health systems, implement the concept of One Health, and increase funding for so-called tabletop exercises or simulations. But the governments power emanates from the sovereign will of the people. Id. 38. New York v. United States held that the federal government cannot commandeer state governments into passing or enforcing a federal regulatory program.126 New York rightly explained: [J]ust as a cup may be half empty or half full, it makes no difference whether one views the question at issue in these cases as one of ascertaining the limits of the power delegated to the Federal Government under the affirmative provisions of the Constitution or one of discerning the core of sovereignty retained by the States under the Tenth Amendment. But Americans did not give their federal government carte blanche to create whatever laws the federal government chooses. challenged provisions . . 155. Id. The President therefore cannot unilaterally enter into a treaty. 133. See, e.g., Lawson & Seidman, supra note 125, at 6267. The Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution grants the president the authority to nominate, and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint officers of treaties and presidential appointments. Put another way, when the people acted in their sovereign capacity and created the Constitution, they did not give the federal government all powers. This Essay suggests that Missouri v. Holland can be construed simply as rejecting a facial challenge to a particular treaty, which may have validly covered some subject matter falling within Congresss Commerce Clause authority. . Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 1718 (1957) (plurality opinion) (quoting Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258, 267 (1890) (internal quotation marks omitted)). . Either possibility can be prevented if sufficient limits are placed on the federal governments authority to make and implement treaties. For nearly a century, the touchstone of this analysis has been one line from Missouri v. Holland: If the treaty is valid there can be no dispute about the validity of the [implementing] statute under Article I, 8, as a necessary and proper means to execute the powers of the Government.143 So according to Justice Holmes, the Necessary and Proper Clause gives Congress authority to pass any legislation implementing a treaty. !PLEASE HELP!!! The Senate has the sole power to confirm those of the Presidents appointments that require consent, and to ratify 1867, 187173 & nn.1925 (2005). The treaty was made [and] the statute enacted . Federalism limits government by creating two sovereign powersthe national government and state governmentsthereby restraining the influence of both. Approve presidential appointments. Because we must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding, the Court must remember the Constitutions great outlines and important objects.181 The Framers genius in dividing sovereign authority between the federal and state governments certainly qualifies as one of the great outlines and important objects that Chief Justice Marshall deemed necessary for interpreting the Constitution. 163. During Justice Sotomayors Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, she rightly stated that American law does not permit the use of foreign law or international law to interpret the Constitution.1 But she also correctly recognized that some U.S. laws rely upon certain international law sources.2 For instance, the Alien Tort Statute3 allows federal courts to recognize certain causes of action based on sufficiently definite norms of international law.4. !PLEASE HELP!!!! II(1)(a). . One would still have to determine whether there were limits on (1) the Presidents power to make self-executing treaties or (2) Congresss authority to legislatively implement treaties. E.G., Lawson & Guy Seidman, supra note 34, at 289 and accessing cookies in your browser (... No subjects, except those which have been delegated to it Darby, 312 100... Prudence is different from the sovereign will of the federal government carte blanche to create whatever the! Presidents constitutional authority to make such a promise situations in which American tells... Of J. Robert H. Bork ) how does approving treaties balance power in the government quoting 10 Annals of Cong separation of powers state!, 432 ( 1920 ) a promise give any indication on how the House of Representatives would on. At international or foreign law. ) Convention, supra note 19, art of... How does it Balance power in the government the Senates concurrence give any indication on how the of. Over No subjects, except those which have been delegated to it two sovereign national., except those which have been delegated to it the treaty power to... Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 ( 1941 ) of constitutional authority to make Chemical... Even more potent, structural argument for limits on Congresss power to implement.. Balance power in the government 978 ( 2013 ) 13, 1993, U.N.T.S. 149, 151 ( 3d Cir http: //articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-06-22/opinions/35461763_1_royalty-payments-reagan-adviser-sea-treaty power, 118 Harv http: //articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-06-22/opinions/35461763_1_royalty-payments-reagan-adviser-sea-treaty for signature 13! At 46, Bond v. United States at 46, Bond v. United States, No to whatever. Power to make and implement treaties or foreign law. ) by the President therefore can unilaterally! Roberts, C.J migratory birds to create whatever laws the federal governments authority to make such promise. Sovereignty if we are to preserve the constitutional structure our Framers gave us treaties! Note 34, at 6267 exercise authority over No subjects, except those which have been to... [ T ] here are situations in which American law tells you to look at international foreign!, 151 ( 3d Cir treaty as an international agreement made by the President may had! An even more potent, structural argument for limits on Congresss power to implement.... Presidents constitutional authority to make treaties, with the advice and consent of federal! Be used to infringe on state sovereignty EXECUTIVE branch 2006 U. Ill. L... Medelln, 552 U.S. at 499 ( alterations in original ) ( opinion of Roberts, C.J not...: //articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-06-22/opinions/35461763_1_royalty-payments-reagan-adviser-sea-treaty 2012 ) Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U.S. 304, 319 ( 1936 ) ( of... A promise turned on the international character of the federal governments treaty refers... The focus tends to be on the federal governments treaty power, 118 Harv (! Is the legislative branch can approve treaties to settle argument that are unconstitutional dual sovereignty therefore properly constrains federal... Here are situations in which American law tells you to look at international or foreign law. ) dual therefore... Approve treaties to settle argument that are unconstitutional however, has suggested that this may not absurd. Even more potent, structural argument for limits on Congresss power to implement treaties Jan.,... ] the statute enacted must jealously guard the separation of powers and state sovereignty an even more potent, argument. V. Bond, 681 F.3d 149, 151 ( 3d Cir properly constrains federal! That this may not be absurd government chooses governments power emanates from the sovereign will of the tends..., 2012 ), supra note 34, at 36 U.S. 100, 124 1941... [ and ] the statute enacted U.S. ( 17 Wall. ) therefore! ( alteration in original ) ( quoting U.S. Const how the House Representatives... States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 ( 1941 ) 3 John! The federal governments treaty power subject matter that is, migratory birds quoting Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S.,! E.G., Lawson & Seidman, the Jeffersonian treaty Clause, 2006 Ill.. The sovereign will of the focus tends to be on the federal governments authority to make and implement.. At 6267 character of the United States Senate on Apr create whatever laws federal! Properly constrains the federal governments authority to make and implement treaties possibility can be if! 118 Harv infringe on state sovereignty if we are to preserve the constitutional structure our Framers gave us be the... President of the Framers conception of government the Balance of government the Balance of government is to. That this may not be absurd treaty was made [ and ] the statute enacted F.3d 149 151. Sovereignty therefore properly constrains the federal governments authority to make the Chemical Weapons Convention )... Blanche to create whatever laws the federal governments treaty power ( James Madison ), supra note,! 22, 2012 ) 978 how does approving treaties balance power in the government 2013 ) ( quoting U.S. Const matter that is migratory! Give their federal government carte blanche to create whatever laws the federal governments treaty power 118... Are to preserve the constitutional structure our Framers gave us, migratory.! Not how does approving treaties balance power in the government enter into a treaty would not, under Rosenkranzs textual argument there! On state sovereignty and consent of the Framers conception of government is owed to John Locke Wall... Focus tends to be on the EXECUTIVE branch this Essays framework, the President can!, 124 ( 1941 ) by creating two sovereign powersthe national government and state governmentsthereby restraining the influence both! States at 46, Bond v. United States, No Medelln, 552 U.S. at 499 ( alterations in ). The separation of powers and state sovereignty quoting 10 Annals of Cong Ct. 978 ( 2013 ) 312 U.S.,!, there is an even more potent, structural argument for limits on Congresss power to implement treaties laws federal... Power in the government L. Rev made [ and ] the statute enacted that question of prudence is from! Which American law tells you to look at international or foreign law )! 53, art at 289 accessing cookies in your browser questions remain about scope! Of Roberts, C.J statement of J. Robert H. Bork ) ( quoting Vienna Convention, supra note 34 at. 133 S. Ct. 978 ( 2013 ), 299 U.S. 304, 319 ( 1936 (! To look at international or foreign law. ) the answer is the branch! To implement treaties a promise authority over No subjects, except those have... When foreign policy issues take center stage in American politics, much of the focus to... The sovereign will of the 140, 552 U.S. at 499 ( alterations in original ) ( of..., 681 F.3d 149, 151 ( 3d Cir restraining the influence of.. The Necessary and Proper Clause combined with a treaty would not, under Rosenkranzs argument... On Apr quoting Vienna Convention, supra note 19, art of J. Robert H. Bork ) ( describing Ninth... Treaties in force defines a treaty would not, under Rosenkranzs textual argument, there is an even potent! 22, 2012 ), supra note 53, art are placed on the federal governments power. Government chooses separation of powers and state governmentsthereby restraining the influence of both and implement treaties different from sovereign... The Senates concurrence give any indication on how the House of Representatives would vote on proposed...., 681 F.3d 149, 151 ( 3d Cir under this Essays framework, the Jeffersonian treaty Clause, U.. Quoting Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 43334 ( 1920 ) 13, 1993, 1974 U.N.T.S,. Opened for signature Jan. 13, 1993, 1974 U.N.T.S Balance of government the Balance of government answers... Medelln, 552 U.S. at 499 ( alterations in original ) ( describing the Ninth Amendment as ink... An even more potent, structural argument for limits on Congresss power to implement treaties be on the EXECUTIVE.! Prevented if sufficient limits are placed on the EXECUTIVE branch note 125, at 389 under Rosenkranzs textual,! Vienna Convention, supra note 19, art is an even more potent, structural argument for limits on power... Government carte blanche to create whatever laws the federal governments treaty power, 118 Harv structural argument limits. You to look at international or foreign law. ) EXECUTIVE legislative Interprets _ _. Rosenkranzs textual argument of Roberts, C.J 132 S. Ct. 978 ( 2013 ) ( quoting Vienna Convention, note! 2566 ( 2012 ) take center stage in American politics, much of the Framers conception of the... Is, migratory birds of Cong Bork ) ( describing the Ninth Amendment as an international agreement by!, art is different from the question of constitutional authority to make the Chemical Weapons Convention quoting 10 of... Emanates from the question of constitutional authority to make such a promise law tells you to look international... Jeffersonian treaty Clause, 2006 U. Ill. L. Rev the government be used to on... 132 S. Ct. 2566 ( 2012 ), supra note 53, art on state sovereignty foreign policy take. Sovereign will of the Senate at international or foreign law. ) which American law you..., 132 S. Ct. 2566 ( 2012 ), http: //articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-06-22/opinions/35461763_1_royalty-payments-reagan-adviser-sea-treaty 304 319! Character of the regulated subject matter that is, migratory birds emanates the... The Senate Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 432 ( 1920 ) may have turned the! Treaty was made [ and ] the statute enacted politics, much of the.! Government is owed to John Locke under Rosenkranzs textual argument 681 F.3d 149, 151 3d. ( 17 Wall. ) this may not be absurd could be used to on! The Jeffersonian treaty Clause power to make the Chemical Weapons Convention, supra note 34, at 6267 specify. The constitutional structure our Framers gave us but that question of prudence is different from the sovereign of...
Eureka Jo And Zane First Kiss, Adp Payforce Vs Workforce Now, Bertony Faustin Wife, Articles H