I am "dwelling on the treaty method" because you falsely claimed that a valid treaty existed. Having lost that argument, you're now trying to move the goalposts. The legality of using a joint resolution to annex Hawaii was hotly debated back in 1898 and remains unresolved. That is not to say, of course, that 100+ years later a US court would ever rule that annexation was NOT valid--it would undoubtedly decline to decide the issue under the Political Question Doctrine or some similar theory. As the US Supreme Court stated in an Indian Law case back in 1823, "Conquest gives a title which the Courts of the conqueror cannot deny." NAFTA is instructive; the legality of its adoption by joint resolution was challenged in Made in the USA Found. v. United States, 242 F3d. 1300 (11th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1039 (2001), in which the court ducked the issue by holding that the method of adoption was a "political question" beyond the competence of the courts to decide.