The Murders of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena (Warning: Brutal Descriptions)
Posted on 03/25/2008 7:41:15 AM PDT by B Knotts
WASHINGTON — President Bush overstepped his authority when he ordered a Texas court to grant a new hearing to a Mexican on death row for rape and murder, the Supreme Court said Tuesday.
In a case that mixes presidential power, international relations and the death penalty, the court sided with Texas 6-3.
Bush was in the unusual position of siding with death row prisoner Jose Ernesto Medellin, a Mexican citizen whom police prevented from consulting with Mexican diplomats, as provided by international treaty.
An international court ruled in 2004 that the convictions of Medellin and 50 other Mexicans on death row around the United States violated the 1963 Vienna Convention, which provides that people arrested abroad should have access to their home country's consular officials. The International Court of Justice, also known as the world court, said the Mexican prisoners should have new court hearings to determine whether the violation affected their cases.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Good.
I meant to say that Ginsburg, Breyer & Souter were the dissenters.
Chief Justice Roberts wrote the Opinion of the Court.
Bush siding here with Ginsburg, Breyer & Souter, also....
Presidential elections always matter folks.....
An international court ruled in 2004 that the convictions of Medellin and 50 other Mexicans on death row around the United States violated the 1963 Vienna Convention
________________________________________________
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
This vicious rape and murder of 2 American teenagers did not happen “internationally”
It happened right here in our country...
The perps were illegal aliens who should never have been here in the first place...
WTH, Bush comes to aid of death row killers if they are Mexican!!
Thank God we now have Alito and Roberts...
Any time the CJ writes the opinion, it means the Court sees the case as especially important.
Was this the case that was delaying executions of death row inmates?
I disagree. Bush sided with the illegal in this case knowing that his decision would not hold up in court. This allowed him to play the diplomacy card while ensuring the illegal would not go free. I know there are a lot of Bush haters, but he has more smarts (and a better staff) than he is credited with.
The big three lose again, and take Mr. Bush along for the ride! When is Texas gonna’ fry this hombre’? Soon, I hope!
That's worth framing.
I think Fox got some of their facts wrong. The prisoner was not PREVENTED from contacting his embassy. He never ASKED to contact the embassy. The embassy issue did not come up until the appeals.
Wow. Good Bush put Roberts on the court. This is an important decision.
Sorry Bush, you lose this one.
Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter, the Three Amigos.
I couldn’t help thinking of this when I saw the name:
“The Medellín Cartel was an organized network of drug smugglers (drug cartel) originating in the city of Medellín in Colombia and operating through the 1970s and 1980s. It was built and run by Pablo Escobar. At its height, it was bringing in as much as $60 million per month, and was estimated by some to be worth as much as $28 billion in total. Other noted figures involved in, or connected with the cartel include the Ochoa family José Gonzalo Rodríguez Gacha, Max Mermelstein, Jon Roberts, Mickey Munday, and Carlos Lehder.”
I’m sure it’s not related.
In sum, while treaties “may comprise international commitments . . . they are not domestic law unless Congress has either enacted implementing statutes or the treaty itself conveys an intention that it be ‘self-executing’ and is ratified on these terms.”
Having Kennedy as the key swing vote is proving to be much better when it was both Kennedy and O’Connor. Sandra swung the court much further to the left than Kennedy.
Right... just like he thought that the Supreme Court would never uphold McCain-Feingold.
His sworn duty is to the Constitution — not to play Rovian games.
>>Bush sided with the illegal in this case knowing that his decision would not hold up in court.<<
I wont say it is a fact, but I suspect you are right.
He wants a Mexican legacy.
Agreed. The issue before the court was that the murderer claimed that his conviction was invalid because he was not informed of his Vienna Convention rights.
ONE MORE TIME Jorge El Segundo demonstrates his incompetence.
The Supremes did the right thing here.
Some day we will all realize that we were had by George W. Bush and that he really is just another evil no-goodnik for sale to the highest bidder. What a disappointment he is.
I think the most important (and encouraging) aspect of this case is the reinforcement of the idea that states are not merely “departments” of the federal government.
Screw that. I don’t want my President playing kissie face with the thugs who run Mexico and I sure as hell don’t want my President holding hands with the King of Saudi Arabia who finances radical Wahhabist mosques in the USA.
Well it’s tricky in this case. President Bush absolutely sucks on securing our borders, but he appointed two good justices. I know, I know, Harriet Miers but I’m talking about what we ended up with.
I don’t want to see a U.S. President bending over for the Saudi King or the kleptocracy in Mexico.
Thank you. At least that’s two of us in the USA who don’t care for this BS.
You are absolutely right ... as usual ;-)
It’s a sad day when our President is aligned with leftists Ginsburg-Breyer-Souter and even Justice Stevens votes with the majority. Let’s execute the scumbag.
What we ended up with is that the Power of the People (trying to say it in my Laura Ingraham voice) overruled the neo-nepotism of the George W Bush administration. That Harriet had to get out of there and another appointed in her place is no credit to George W. Bush. It is a credit to all of this who raised up our voices and demanded better for America.
The only thing it means is he wanted to write it or other justices in the majority are working on other opinions and he tried to balance to workload. The CJ decises who writes the majority opinion if he is part of the majority. If not, the senior Justice in the majority decides. I noticed that Rhenquist almost always wrote the opinions in defamation cases.
Unfortunately in today’s dishonest political atmosphere, one must play games to stay ahead.
Many seem to hold that Bush made up intelligence to invade Iraq. In the intelligence community, when a piece of intelligence comes across your desk, you have to decide to act upon it or throw it in the garbage. In the case of the President, he’s wrong no matter what he chooses. I see this case of the illegal as being a similar situation. No matter what Bush chooses, he is wrong with somebody.
As my representative, I give him the authority to act on my behalf. In my view sometimes he is right and other times he is wrong. I just hope that the decisions he makes are the ones that will protect my country the most.
Well, if that isn't a pant load. There aren't that many Bush haters here, many of us just aren't impressed with either his liberal leanings or his "smarts". Being unhappy with is not the same thing as hating. Also, as someone else pointed out, his job is uphold the Constitution and not play political games.
Amen. The nominations of Alito and Roberts are two of the very few good things to come out of Bush's second term. Can anyone doubt that Harriet Miers would have sided with the Ginsberg-Souter-Breyer wing?
I disagree. Bush sided with the illegal in this case knowing that his decision would not hold up in court. This allowed him to play the diplomacy card while ensuring the illegal would not go free. I know there are a lot of Bush haters, but he has more smarts (and a better staff) than he is credited with.”
You know what would be interesting? What if we made the President SWEAR TO UPHOLD the Constitution. Maybe that would change things.
Oh, wait a second....
Woo hoo!
The Murders of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena (Warning: Brutal Descriptions)
Bovine scatology! Bush is, quite simply, an open-borders, suck-up-to-Mexico, illegal-alien-loving guy. Where's the fence?
Well he deserves partial credit for Alito and full credit for Roberts.
How many were illegal aliens of the 50?
If you are here illegally then you should waive some of those rights.
also,
WHY didn’t they have access to their consulate? If they claim they are not illegals and in the USA legally then they only lies condemn them.
As far as I understand it, Medellin had been here since he was a baby—born in Mexico, but raised here. At the time of arrest, the police had no reason to suspect that he wasn’t a citizen.
Worse, where does he stand with wrongfully coinvicted Border Patrol Officers who kill scum drug dealers in the line of duty but get incarcerated anyway? Our President has shown his true globalist NWO credentials at last. No wonder he's endorsed McCain and that alone gives me pause in the matter of voting for McCain.
From a news article:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1908103/posts
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, Netherlands, on behalf of Medellin and 50 other Mexicans on death row in the U.S.
Yeah...and why does he side with illegals & Mexico on the border fence, amnesty, locking up Border Patrol agents doing their job, calling Minutemen vigilantes.... Do I have to go on?
B.S.! When it comes to illegals and Mexico, Bush always puts America 2nd... and that sadly is the unescapable truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.