US Supreme Court Over Rules Bush and The World Court (Merged)

This is a discussion on US Supreme Court Over Rules Bush and The World Court (Merged) within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; The US State Department and Bush sided with the World Court, the Mexican government and an illegal alien murderer. I gotta puke. Supreme court rules ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 41

Thread: US Supreme Court Over Rules Bush and The World Court (Merged)

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017

    US Supreme Court Over Rules Bush and The World Court (Merged)

    The US State Department and Bush sided with the World Court, the Mexican government and an illegal alien murderer. I gotta puke.

    Supreme court rules US courts are independent of Hague | World news | guardian.co.uk

    US courts are not bound by the international court of justice or by direct orders from the president, the supreme court ruled today when it refused to allow a fresh hearing for a Mexican on death row.

    In a 6-3 decision, the supreme court ruled that courts in Texas were not compelled to comply with a ruling from the ICJ to allow a new hearing for the Mexican inmate because he had not been given access to consular assistance. State courts were also not obliged to follow orders from George Bush, who had instructed Texas to comply with the ICJ, the ruling said.

    The decision could put the US at odds with EU countries and Mexico which had urged the supreme court to order a new hearing for José Ernesto Medellín.

    It was also a rebuff for Bush who had put been put in the awkward position of trying to shield Medellín, a gang member convicted in 1993 of raping and strangling to death two teenage girls. The intervention was all the more difficult for Bush because Texas is his home state. As governor he signed the death warrant for more than 150 prisoners.

    But the supreme court decided today that in the Medellín case Bush had overstepped his powers by instructing the Texas courts to comply with the ICJ.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    Don't mess with Texas! We'll just kill you...it's different here.

    New Trial??? You don't get no stinkin' new trial...now if we could just bring back public hangings.

    I think criminals are finally starting to get the idea that Texas isn't the best place to practice their profession.
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array packinnova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerbouchard View Post
    Don't mess with Texas! We'll just kill you...it's different here.
    AMEN! I'm a Virginian, but I've got no qualms with the way Texas works.
    "My God David, We're a Civilized society."

    "Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the **** out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
    -The Mist (2007)

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    like I've always said, if you want Justice, turn 'em over to the Texans, we'll take care of Justice........

    or we can turn loose a few Texas Rangers to settle things.
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array deadeye72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Central Mississippi
    Posts
    4,283
    Thank you Supreme Court. To heck with the ICJ, Mexico, and anybody else that does not like it.
    Glock 27
    BENELLI NOVA

  7. #6
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,476
    Thank you, Supreme Court of the United States!

  8. #7
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,222
    He shoulda been hung with a rope in an old Oak tree. A crook, druggy, and rapist. It was a pure technical issue anyway - whether he had not been advised of his right to Mexican Counsular (Embassy) notification.

  9. #8
    Member Array tabsr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    282

    Supreme Court Judges

    The importance of the next election.

    WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court Tuesday issued a broad ruling limiting presidential power and the reach of international treaties, saying neither President Bush nor the World Court has the authority to order a Texas court to reopen a death penalty case involving a foreign national.

    The court held 6 to 3 that judgments of the international court are not binding on U.S. courts and Bush's 2005 executive order that courts in Texas comply anyway does not change that. The decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., was a rebuke to the government in a case that involved the powers of all three branches of government, the intricacies of treaties and the international debate over the death penalty.

    It placed the president on the side of Ernesto Medellin, a brutal murderer, and the rulings of the International Court of Justice and against the authority of his home state's courts.

    Texas's high court had rejected the World Court's judgment that it "review and reconsider" Medellin's conviction because he is a Mexican national and was not advised after his arrest that he could meet with a consular from his country, as the Vienna Convention requires.

    Even though the administration disagreed with the World Court' s decision -- and has withdrawn from the international pact that gave it force -- Bush nonetheless issued a memorandum ordering the Texas courts to rehear Medellin's case.

    But Roberts wrote that neither the Optional Protocol of the Vienna Convention nor the operative part of the United Nations charter creates binding law in the absence of implementing legislation from Congress.

    And he wrote that the government had not made the case that Bush had the power to issue a directive that "reaches deep into the heart of the state's police powers and compels state courts to reopen final criminal judgments and set aide neutrally applicable state laws."

    Joining Roberts were the justices who are most consistently conservative: Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr.

    Justice John Paul Stevens concurred in the case, but for different reasons than Roberts gave. Stevens agreed Texas could not be forced to reconsider the case, but urged it to do so nonetheless, especially because its failure to advise Medellin of his rights "ensnared the United States in the current controversy."

    Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in dissent that the court had misread the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which says properly ratified treaties "shall be the supreme law of the land" and that the treaties at issue did not need to be implemented by congressional legislation.

    "As a result, the nation may well break its word even though the president seeks to live up to that word and Congress has done nothing to suggest the contrary," Breyer wrote. He was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

    Roberts said to accept Medellin's argument would make World Court decisions not only binding domestic law but also "unassailable."

    Bush's intentions -- to ensure reciprocal observance of the Vienna Convention with foreign governments, protect international relations and show a commitment to international law -- are "plainly compelling," Roberts wrote. "Such considerations, however, do not allow us to set aside first principles."

    Frederick Kirgis, a professor of international law at Washington and Lee University, said he was surprised that the court was not more deferential to the president.

    "It is a matter of diplomacy, after all, and the president is the chief diplomat, and he has acted," Kirgis said, adding that the reaction of other governments, especially Mexico's, is "certain to be negative."

    The Mexican Foreign Affairs Ministry said it regretted the court's decision and its lawyers are reviewing the implications for "other Mexican nationals facing death sentences, in order to determine immediate legal actions to preserve their rights."

    The case involved Medellin and 50 other Mexican nationals who have been convicted in U.S. courts.

    Medellin, 33, has lived in the United States since he was 3; he speaks and writes English but is still a Mexican national. He was part of a gang that attacked Jennifer Ertman, 14, and Elizabeth Pena, 16, as they walked home from a friend's house. They were raped and murdered, one strangled with her shoestring.

    Medellin signed a waiver of his Miranda right to remain silent and confessed within hours of his arrest. But he was not told of his right to talk to the consulate of his country. Medellin did not raise that right during his trial but did in one of his death penalty appeals.

    The administration first argued against Mexico, then in 2005 Bush issued his memorandum to the attorney general saying that the United States will "discharge its international obligations ... by having state courts give effect to the decision" of the World Court.

    White House press secretary Dana Perino said Bush was disappointed with the decision and is reviewing it to see how it might influence international relations.
    "Politicians and Bureaucrats, depend very much on the complicity of their victims, and like criminals, are flummoxed when we don't play the victim role."

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array joleary223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,057
    Don't get me wrong, this guy deserves to die a painful death but the problem I see here is that some poor American is going to get railroaded by some other country in retaliation of this ruling.
    Glad I don't travel abroad.
    CRIME..... LAW DEFINES, POLICE ENFORCE, CITIZENS PREVENT!

    FOUR BOXES KEEP US FREE: [1] SOAP [2] BALLOT [3] JURY [4] AMMO!

  11. #10
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,222
    The correct decision, although Medellin's justice would have been served better and faster with a rope and a Texas Oak tree.

    Probably will make it tougher on US citizens in Mexican prisons tho......A good reason to stay out of Mexico and their prisons........LOL

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,476
    Quote Originally Posted by joleary223 View Post
    Glad I don't travel abroad.
    I must confess, I don't see much reason to do so anymore either. The last time I went out of the states (except for a one-hour trek to Tijuana in 1986), I was in BDUs and surrounded by tanks and artillery.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    Actually, in Texas it will take us about 8.5 years to kill him if we maintain our current pace.
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array SixBravo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    1,692
    I'm still baffled as to why the turd is still alive. The Romanians could teach us something with how they handled Nikolai Chauchesku.
    The Gunsite Blog
    ITFT / Quick Kill Review
    "It is enough to note, as we have observed, that the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon." - Justice Scalia, SCOTUS - DC v Heller - 26 JUN 2008

  15. #14
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    It's Texas...nobody tells us what to do. We will kill our criminals as we see fit...period.

    We do what we want, but I would suggest merging this thread with http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...rld-court.html

    But, in all honesty...Bush is the president of the nation. He can't exactly go with a hardball aproach to everything. It IS a diplomatic issue.

    WE in TX don't care about diplomats...It's different here. We kill you for killing us.
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  16. #15
    Member Array aepilotjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Tulsa OK
    Posts
    232
    I can see this issues was really a lose/lose situation. We lose is if we reopen the case, then any country can whine and cry when one of theirs breaks a law in our country and mess with our court system. We lose if we don't, because then the other countries will go out of their way to make sure we don't get counsular support if we get in trouble over there. I actually think Bush and Texas played this one smartly. Now Bush can go to Mexico and the IJC and say he tried, that should placate them. And Texas has set up the precident, so the next time the next state has something to cite for support.

    Falcon1, I like your method of travel abroad. Tell me, was it hard to find parking at the hotels?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Supreme Court taking on Chicago Gun laws: MERGED
    By NYcarry in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: October 10th, 2009, 12:02 PM
  2. One for the good guys! Cities can't ban guns from parks, Ohio Supreme Court rules
    By Divebum47 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: September 19th, 2008, 12:59 PM
  3. When the Supreme Court rules in our favor....what's our next step?
    By hudsonvalley in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: March 22nd, 2008, 10:58 AM

Search tags for this page

bush world court warrants

,

supreme court over rules world court

,

world court over rules supreme court

Click on a term to search for related topics.