Could it be? No, Obama wouldn't… He wouldn’t circumvent the Senate to solidify his deal with Iran. Or will he? The Daily Beast reports that instead of taking his Iran deal to the Senate – per the instructions enumerated in the Constitution – Obama may take his executive agreement to the United Nations, where it would have force of international law. Tim Mak writes, “The existing framework of sanctions against Iran is multifaceted: there are sanctions imposed by the United Nations, by Congress, and through executive actions. While the U.N. could not repeal American domestic sanctions, it could lift existing U.N. sanctions and the White House could use its executive authorities to ease American sanctions. … But if an agreement between the United States and Iran became the basis for a U.N. Security Council resolution featuring sanctions relief, as suggested by former Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith, it could immediately impose legally binding obligations under international law – without the need for congressional approval in the near-term.” Such a move would not only be unconstitutional, it would be periconstitutional, as Obama would have completely moved outside the framework of the Constitution to circumvent it. As media director for The Israel Project Omri Ceren told the Beast: “The domestic backlash would be so epic you’d need to dig up Homer just to get someone capable of writing about it.” More…