do we need a constitutional amendment to get out of treaties?

[unblock]

early in the shrub occupancy, 1-term junior simply announced that we were abandoning signed international agreements. or maybe he did it by executive order, i don't recall the details, or even which of his "we are the world" policies actually broke treaties.

regardless, the question is, what IS the proper procedure for getting out of a treaty? let's suspend disbelief and pretend people start actually following the constitution again.

getting INTO a treaty is clear, that's spelled out in the constitution, and a treaty then becomes the "supreme law of the land".

but can we cancel a treaty by.... what, executive order? ordinary law (majorities in each house + president OR 2/3 of each house? or does it need to get superseded by another treaty?

or do we need a constitutional amendment to settle this one?

[FDRrocks]

1. Ask the Native Americans

We just... disavow treaties. Doesn't matter, I guess.

[unblock]

2. "we"? yes, the united states has and does, but exactly who is "we"

is it normal to disavow treaties by executive order? by executive inaction? i'm asking for the MEAN by which this is done, and whether we need the constitution to precisely spell out how it should properly be done.