Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/13pdf/12-158_6579.pdf
Page Number: 58

Cite as:  572 U. S. ____ (2014) 

1 

ALITO, J., concurring in judgment 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 12–158 
_________________ 

CAROL ANNE BOND, PETITIONER v. UNITED
 
STATES 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
 

[June 2, 2014]

 JUSTICE ALITO, concurring in the judgment. 
As  explained  in  Part  I  of  JUSTICE  SCALIA’s  concurring
opinion,  which  I  join,  petitioner’s  conduct  violated  18
U. S. C. §229, the federal criminal statute under which she
was  convicted.    I  therefore  find  it  necessary  to  reach  the 
question  whether  this  statute  represents  a  constitutional 
exercise of federal power, and as the case comes to us, the
only  possible  source  of  federal  power  to  be  considered  is
the treaty power. 

For  the  reasons  set  out  in  Parts  I–III  of  JUSTICE 
THOMAS’  concurring  opinion,  which  I  join,  I  believe  that
the  treaty  power  is  limited  to  agreements  that  address
matters  of  legitimate  international  concern.    The  treaty 
pursuant to which §229 was enacted, the Chemical Weap-
ons  Convention,  is  not  self-executing,  and  thus  the  Con-
vention  itself  does  not  have  domestic  effect  without  con-
gressional  action.    The  control  of  true  chemical  weapons, 
as  that  term  is  customarily  understood,  is  a  matter  of
great international concern, and therefore the heart of the 
Convention clearly represents a valid exercise of the treaty 
power.  But  insofar  as  the  Convention  may  be  read  to 
obligate  the  United  States  to  enact  domestic  legislation 
criminalizing  conduct  of  the  sort  at  issue  in  this  case, 
which  typically  is  the  sort  of  conduct  regulated  by  the 
States,  the  Convention  exceeds  the  scope  of  the  treaty