No, Trump can’t legally withdraw the U.S. from NATO by executive order

As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to return to the White House, world leaders are looking to see how he will handle key foreign affairs issues, from the wars in Ukraine and Gaza to the levying of tariffs.

Among the concerns is whether Trump will uphold American commitments to NATO, the alliance between the United States and much of Europe that was constructed largely to counteract the influence of Russia.

In the past, Trump has criticized NATO, saying it relies too heavily on American money and military strength. He renewed those concerns in a recent interview on “Meet the Press,” in which he said his commitment to NATO is contingent upon other countries’ financial contributions.

“If they’re paying their bills and if I think they’re treating us fairly, the answer is absolutely I’d stay with NATO,” he told moderator Kristen Welker, before saying he would “absolutely” consider withdrawing from the alliance if those conditions aren’t met.

VERIFY reader Michael emailed us to ask whether Trump would actually have the power to leave NATO unilaterally.

THE QUESTION

Could Trump withdraw the United States from NATO via executive order?

THE SOURCES

• U.S. Constitution

• National Defense Authorization Act for 2024

• North Atlantic Treaty

• Scott R. Anderson, Senior Fellow, National Security Law Program, Columbia Law School

THE ANSWER

No, Trump cannot legally withdraw the United States from NATO via executive order. Federal law requires congressional approval to leave the alliance.

WHAT WE FOUND

There is a law explicitly prohibiting the president from unilaterally leaving NATO, though some experts say there may be ways around it.

The issue of entering treaties is addressed directly in the Constitution.

Article II, Section 2 says 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.”

However, the Constitution does not say anything about what has to happen for the U.S. to exit a treaty.

In modern times, it’s generally accepted that the president has the authority to withdraw from treaties unilaterally.

“Today, the conventional wisdom is that the president generally has the legal authority to suspend, terminate, or withdraw from a treaty on behalf of the United States… without having to secure any concurrence from Congress,” Scott R. Anderson, a fellow at Brookings and Columbia Law School, wrote in Lawfare.

But as of last year, there is a specific exception for NATO.

In 2023, Congress passed a law that says, “The President shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty… except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress.”

In other words, to withdraw from NATO, Trump would need either a supermajority of senators or a majority of both chambers of Congress to vote to approve the decision.

After that, the U.S. would remain in NATO for a one-year waiting period, per Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty, before it would be fully withdrawn.

Despite the existence of this law, legal experts say there are questions about whether or not it is enforceable. 

For example, if Trump were to eventually announce he was withdrawing America from NATO, in violation of this law, the legal recourse would be to sue and have the courts stop him. But it’s not clear who would have the authority to start such a lawsuit.

“Unless someone with the necessary standing is willing to challenge an attempted exit from NATO in the federal courts, then even an unlawful one may well prove effective simply by evading judicial review,” wrote Anderson.

Experts say most likely it would have to be Congress itself, and that would require some sort of vote, which may not pass given Republicans will control both chambers.

Short of withdrawing, Trump will still have options at his disposal that could significantly weaken America's role in the alliance. As commander-in-chief, he can refuse to send diplomats or troops for NATO purposes.