hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Requires Senate approval for U.S. entry into international climate agreements.
Senator Barrasso (R-WY) and 24 Republican co-sponsors.
Introduced in the Senate, awaiting committee action.
This bill, introduced by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and 24 Republican colleagues, would require the U.S. Senate to approve any international climate agreement, including those that demand legally binding reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. This means agreements like the Paris Agreement would need a two-thirds vote in the Senate to be implemented. Currently, the bill has been introduced and referred to a committee for review, which is the first step in the legislative process.
Introduced Jan 28, 2026
The bill was introduced in the Senate on January 28, 2026, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. For it to become law, it would need to pass through this committee, be voted on and approved by the full Senate, then pass the House of Representatives, and finally be signed by the President.
If this bill becomes law, the United States could not enter into or rejoin major international climate agreements without the Senate's formal 'advice and consent,' which typically means a two-thirds vote. This would also apply to agreements that commit the U.S. to legally binding cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, like the Paris Agreement. Additionally, no federal money could be spent to carry out or comply with any such agreement unless it had received that Senate approval.
Supporters Say
Supporters argue it increases accountability and ensures the Senate has a constitutional role in significant international commitments.
Critics Say
Critics might argue it could hinder the U.S.'s ability to address global climate change and participate in international diplomacy.
Proponents of the bill believe that agreements with major implications, like international climate deals, should be subject to the same rigorous approval process as formal treaties, ensuring broader democratic input. Opponents, however, might express concerns that such a requirement could make it extremely difficult for the U.S. to engage effectively in global efforts to combat climate change, potentially isolating the nation on a critical global issue.