(CNSNews.com) - One of the cases the Supreme Court will hear in its new term has officials from Texas accusing their former governor, President George W. Bush, of overstepping his authority by ordering them to follow an international court's ruling about an illegal immigrant who's been convicted of murder. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on Oct. 10 regarding Medellin v. Texas, and the high court's decision will affect the treatment of more than 50 Mexicans on death row in the U.S., as well as about 6,000 American citizens who are accused of crimes each year while traveling or living abroad.
The controversy began in Houston on June 24, 1993. While 16-year-old Elizabeth Pena and 15-year-old Jennifer Ertman were walking home after visiting a friend, they were kidnapped, raped, and strangled by Jose Medellin and other members of a gang known as the Black and Whites.
Medellin -- who was in the U.S. illegally -- was tried and convicted of capital murder in 1994 and was sentenced to death. After losing a number of appeals, he wrote to Mexican consular authorities on April 29, 1997, and they began providing him with legal assistance.
In January 2003, as the case was pending in district court, the Mexican government initiated proceedings in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the U.S., alleging violations of the Vienna Convention regarding Medellin and more than 50 other Mexican nationals who had been sentenced to death in state criminal proceedings.
The ICJ ruled on March 31, 2004, that the U.S. had violated Article 36 of the Vienna Convention -- which allows consular officers to protect nationals who are detained in foreign countries' courts -- and said the courts should review all the cases.
But two months later, the U.S. court in New Orleans rejected Medellin's appeal, because he hadn't raised the issue during his trial. The Supreme Court also refused to overturn his conviction.
Then on Feb. 28, 2005, President Bush announced that the United States would "discharge its international obligations" by giving the Mexican nationals "review and reconsideration" in the state courts.
Nevertheless, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled last November that the president's determination exceeded his powers, and it refused to follow the ICJ ruling. Medellin and his attorneys have appealed this decision to the Supreme Court.
"We find ourselves in an unusual position," Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz told a conference on the case held last Thursday in Washington, D.C., by the American Enterprise Institute Legal Center for the Public Interest. "Texas is not regularly litigating against the United States."
The case also puts Cruz in an unusual position-he served as domestic policy adviser to the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2000 and was a key player during that year's Florida recount.
Still, Cruz called Bush's 2005 announcement regarding the ICJ ruling "a breathtaking order" and stated that a president free to "flick state laws off the books on a simple assertion of international comity" would lead to "enormous mischief."
"This president's exercise of this power is egregiously beyond the bounds of presidential authority," he said.
Not so, argues U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement in his amicus brief on the case. State courts can't be allowed to veto treaty obligations, and the president has inherent authority in such matters stemming from his unique role in U.S. foreign policy.
"The authority to decide whether this nation will comply with an ICJ decision and, if so, how compliance should be achieved, falls on the president," Clement states in the document.
"In this case, for example, the president was best positioned to balance the harm from complying with a decision with which he disagreed against the adverse consequences to the conduct of foreign affairs, and to American citizens abroad that would attend defiance of the decision," he says.
However, Ilya Shapiro, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, told Cybercast News Service on Monday that the case is intriguing for legal scholars, because it deals with the law on both international and federal levels.
Rulings from the ICJ "are not self-executing," he said, and depend on local and national governments to enforce them.
As a result, the case may turn on the "swing vote" often being cast by Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy and whether he wants the U.S. and the Supreme Court to be thought of highly in other countries. "After all," Shapiro said, "his decision might only result in one more hearing" for Medellin and the other Mexicans facing a death sentence in the U.S.
Nevertheless, Shapiro said that "not only is this a case of federal leaders trying to commandeer state government," it is also an example of "the executive branch trying to tell the judicial branch what to do."
"Ultimately, the ruling should go against the president," he added.
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
I was telling my wife tonight that the world is so f upside down I expect to look down and see the sky. I'm in complete fear for our Country, and most of the rest of the world has already done themselves in. Pray harder people.
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
There is more to come that we dont know about yet.This article is on Save our State,and his lawyer who just lied about LOST to Senator Vitter in the hearings said that Bush has also signed over four hundred other international agreements.Bush has probably already sold our nation down the toilet!!There has to be a way to impeach this crapweasel,and get him out of our whitehouse!
I'm sure there is a way to impeach Bush but if we don't have those whose job it is to do so, willing what can we do. There is not one person, Democrat, Republican, Independent, male, female, black, white or pink with purple polka dots, in authority with the guts to do it. And we don't just need impeachment. That doesn't remove him from office. We need removal! Bush has pulled so many arrogant tricks that there are plenty of impeachable offenses.
WASHINGTON - To put it bluntly, Texas wants President Bush to get out of the way of the state's plan to execute a Mexican for the brutal killing of two teenage girls.
Bush, who presided over 152 executions as governor of Texas, wants to halt the execution of Jose Ernesto Medellin in what has become a confusing test of presidential power that the Supreme Court, which hears the case this week, ultimately will sort out.
The president wants to enforce a decision by the International Court of Justice that found the convictions of Medellin and 50 other Mexican-born prisoners violated their rights to legal help as outlined in the 1963 Vienna Convention.
That is the same court Bush has since said he plans to ignore if it makes similar decisions affecting state criminal laws.
"The president does not agree with the ICJ's interpretation of the Vienna Convention," the administration said in arguments filed with the court. This time, though, the U.S. agreed to abide by the international court's decision because ignoring it would harm American interests abroad, the government said.
Texas argues that neither the international court nor Bush has any say in Medellin's case.
Medellin was born in Mexico but spent much of his childhood in the United States. He was 18 in June 1993, when he and other members of the Black and Whites gang in Houston encountered two teenage girls on a railroad trestle.
The girls were gang-raped and strangled. Their bodies were found four days later.
Medellin was arrested a few days later. He was told he had a right to remain silent and have a lawyer present, but the police did not tell him that he could request assistance from the Mexican consulate.
Medellin gave a written confession. He was convicted of murder in the course of a sexual assault, a capital offense in Texas. A judge sentenced him to death in October 1994.
Medellin did not raise the lack of assistance from Mexican diplomats during his trial or sentencing. When he did claim his rights had been violated, Texas and federal courts turned him down because he had not objected at his trial. Mexico later sued the United States in the International Court of Justice in The Hague on behalf of Medellin and 50 other Mexicans on death row in the U.S.
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
Tell me Bush hasn't given the Sovereignty of the United States away to the lowest bidder! What we have total failure to carry out his oath of office.
It might be a little to late to do alot of good but it'll sure send a message to those idiots in DC that we ain't going to take it anymore! IMPEACHMENT NEEDED NOW.
Here are four Articles of Impeachment as put forth by the Center for Constitutional Rights. Each of the four have substantial supporting documentation, which includes the Congressional Record, private correspondence from government officials, public statements by President Bush and other Administration officials, press accounts, and court documents. I have written below verbatim the Articles of Impeachment from a book by William Goodman, Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, entitled: Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush, (Hoboken, New Jersey: Melville House Publishing, 2006).
Article I
George W. Bush, in his conduct of the Office of the President of the United States, has abused his power by violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch, and failing to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by directing or authorizing the National Security Agency and various other agencies within the intelligence community to conduct electronic surveillance outside of the statutes Congress has prescribed as the exclusive means for such surveillance, and to use such information for purposes unknown but unrelated to any lawful program of electronic surveillance from Congress, the press, and the public. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Article II
The impeachment of George W. Bush, President of the United States, is warranted by his initiation and continuation of the Iraq war. The initiation and continuation of the war constitutes a high crime and misdemeanor and is illegal as well. In undertaking that war, George W. Bush violated his oath of office and constitutional obligation that the laws be faithfully executed. George W. Bush has subverted the Constitution, its guarantee of a republican form of government, and the constitutional separation of powers by undermining the rightful authority of Congress to declare war, oversee foreign affairs, and make appropriations. He did so by justifying the war with false and misleading statements and deceived the people of the United States as well as Congress. He denied the electorate the right to make an informed choice and thereby undermined democracy. George W. Bush also committed fraud against the United States by lying to and intentionally misleading Congress about the reasons for the Iraq war. George W. Bush acted contrary to his trust as president, and subverted the constitutional government to the prejudice of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal of office.
Article III
George W. Bush, in his conduct of the Office of the President of the United States, has abused his power by violating the constitutional and international rights of citizens and non-citizens by arbitrarily detaining them indefinitely inside and outside of the United States, without due process, without charges, and with limited -- if any -- access to counsel or courts. George W. Bush has abused his power and failed to faithfully execute the laws of the United States by allowing his administration to condone torture, failing to investigate and prosecute high-level officials responsible for torture, and officially refusing to accept the binding nature of a statutory ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. George W. Bush has offended our system of government by attempting to expand his power at the expense of the other two branches of government. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Article IV
George W. Bush, in his conduct of the Office of the President of the United States, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws by faithfully executed, has arrogated excessive power to the executive branch in violation of basic constitutional principles of the separation of powers. This conduct has included one or more of the following: He has violated federal law by conducting surveillance of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil without a judicial warrant, as is required by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was specifically enacted to check executive power. He has engaged in mass detentions both in and outside of the United States without permitting any judicial review of such detentions. He has formally declared his intent to violate the laws enacted by Congress by appending a "signing statement" to legislation that asserts his right to carve out exceptions to legislation as he sees fit, thereby arrogating to himself legislative powers reserved solely to Congress. In all of this, George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as president and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
For many leading Democrats who will be taking charge of the 110th Congress in January the idea of taking steps to impeach George W. Bush is "off the table." I understand their hesitancy to invoke such a drastic remedy that our nation's founders so thoughtfully included in our Constitution for addressing unlawful actions by a President. But I agree with Henry Hyde, James Sensebrenner, Lyndsey Graham, Trent Lott, and other wise leaders that the rule of law is so important to our society and to our form of republican government that we must check the powers of the Chief Executive when there is evidence of a failure on the part of the President to uphold his oath of office. Our democracy depends on it.
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
Reenie said:There is more to come that we dont know about yet.This article is on Save our State,and his lawyer who just lied about LOST to Senator Vitter in the hearings said that Bush has also signed over four hundred other international agreements.Bush has probably already sold our nation down the toilet!!There has to be a way to impeach this crapweasel,and get him out of our whitehouse!
Problem is, Cheney is worse than Bush is. Cheney pulls the strings and Bush dances. Cheney must go first.
GET CONGRESS ATTENTION! CHANGE YOUR W-4 AT WORK AND CLAIM 10 DEPENDENTS SO NO TAXES WILL BE TAKEN FROM YOUR PAYCHECK. WHEN THE MONEY STOPS COMING IN MAYBE THEY WILL REMEMBER THEY ARE SERVANTS TO WE THE PEOPLE.
What the hell is going on with our President? If it is up held in court, it will set presidence, and therefore no illegal on death row will be executed! We the tax payers will be responsibile for their support for the rest of their lives!! If this was such an issue why wasn't it important before now? Makes you wonder what kind of deals our Pres has with Mexico that we don't know about. Is the ACLU involved?
The president gave an oath to uphold the Constitution and enforce it's laws, as far as I'm concerned he isn't and that alone should call for impeachment. Damn are we going to have to support the Democrats just to get something done. Everythings upside down.
"Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams
Clear your head, REMEMBER Bush did not GET ELECTED. HE STOLE THE ELECTION FROM GORE ,Then FROM KERRY .I believe the <BUSH> is a theaf ,a lier but more important i believe he is a TRATOR to this country.
Posted December 14, 2006 | 07:46 AM (EST)