"...The court concludes that the treaty termination issue is a nonjusticiable 'political question' that cannot be resolved by courts," US District Judge John Bates wrote Monday in his opinion. "Accordingly, this action will be dismissed."

The suit was brought last June by 32 members of the House of Representatives led by Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinich, who asserted that President George W. Bush's decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty to pursue a vigorous missile defense program was unconstitutional.

The lawmakers argued that since international treaties were usually ratified by the Senate and considered law of the land, the president had no power to repeal the accord without congressional approval.

The treaty, signed by the United States and the Soviet Union in 1972, prohibited nationwide missile defense systems.

The Bush administration gave Moscow the required six-month's notice in December 2001, informing it of its decision to abandon the treaty. The withdrawal formally took effect last June.

Free of ABM constraints, Bush announced two weeks ago his decision to begin deploying as early as 2004 a limited missile shield to protect the United States against attack by terrorists or "rogue" nations like North Korea, Iran and Iraq.

The plan calls for deploying 16 ground-based interceptor missiles at Fort Greeley, Alaska, and four interceptors at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California by the end of 2005.

In addition, up to 20 sea-based weapons capable of intercepting missiles in the boost phase of their flight will be placed aboard ships equipped with Aegis battle management systems, according to the Pentagon.

All these projects would have been illegal had the ABM Treaty remained in effect, according to arms control experts.

Without commenting on the merits of the treaty, the judge harshly chastised the lawmakers for what he saw as an attempt to use the judiciary for achieving goals they had failed to attain through the legislative process.

He said Congress could have denied the Pentagon missile defense funds, passed legislation banning deployment of the interceptors or otherwise forced the president to back down if it wanted to block the anti-missile system and salvage the accord.

"Indeed, in the year since President Bush announced his intention to withdraw from the ABM Treaty, neither the House nor Congress has made any attempt whatsoever to register disapproval as a body, or to insist on a role in the termination of the treaty," stressed Bates.

Reminding the lawmakers that under the constitution the judicial branch has no role in foreign affairs, the judge stated that he did not want "to encourage congressmen to run to court any time they disargeed with presidential action ... or were on the losing end of a piece of legislation."

Neither Kucinich nor other plaintiffs were immediately available for comment.

SPACE.WIRE