Bush Sides With Mexican Killers Against U.S.
June 14th, 2007 . by TexasFredThere’s an old saying, “Don’t mess with Texas.” Well, Bush did
The State Department’s top legal adviser told international lawyers on June 6 that President Bush is so committed to the primacy of international law that he has taken his home state of Texas to court on behalf of a group of Mexican killers. The Mexicans had been sentenced to death for murdering U.S. citizens, including young children.
(snip)
Presidential PowerHow did the President do this?
On February 28, 2005, Bush simply made a “determination” and assumed the power to tell the states what to do.
He declared, “I have determined, pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States, that the United States will discharge its international obligations under the decision of the International Court of Justice in the Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America), 2004 I.C.J. 128 (Mar. 31), by having state courts give effect to the decision in accordance with general principles of comity in cases filed by the 51 Mexican nationals addressed in that decision.”
(snip)
Texas Says NoBellinger acknowledged that “The first defendant to try to take advantage of the President’s decision was in the state of Texas, which objected to the President’s decision. In response, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that the President had no power to intervene in its affairs, even to obtain compliance with an order of the ICJ. This Administration has gone to the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse this decision. We expect a ruling from that Court this time next year.”
So here we have a case of the Bush Administration going to the U.S. Supreme Court in an effort to enforce compliance with an international court! And the case involves litigating against the President’s home state of Texas!
There’s an old saying, “Don’t mess with Texas.” Well, Bush did.
Full & Unbroken Story Here:
Bush Sides With Mexican Killers Against U.S.
I don’t even know where to begin, I am beyond words…
EDIT: I DO know this, there have been some awesome bloggers read and comment on this rather knotty Constitutional issue and I have a much better understanding now… Â
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Thanks for bringing this to my attention Fred!
What next, he’s going to “cooperate” with ahmadinnerjacket with siding against the US and for the illegal OTM’s????
I’m down here in Arizona and we’re facing the same thing-and totally disgusted with it!
Damn…
Well it’s not unbelievable given his track record, but the oh so loyal She Bot will try to find some rationalization to this I’m sure…
He is indeed a traitor and nothing less.
A f-king idiot that needs a very large ” Everythings BIGGER in Texas” armadillo skinned cowboy boot in his ” I appreciate that” ASS!
Even as much as I am disgusted with Bush I was still stunned when I first read that article earlier today. Like you Fred I am seldom completely wiothout words fo any sort. This was one of those times. Im not sure America can survive the last year of George Bush’s Presidency. At least not in any form I would ever recognize as American. Its tiem for Bush to GO.
I don’t get Bush any more. He’s not the same man I voted for. This is (almost) unbelievable.
Thanks Fred this is the first I’ve heard about this and I am enraged over it!
What in the hell is Bush trying to do?? This is treasonous as far as I am concerned. Since when do we have to listen to the ICJ on anything regarding murderers in our own country? Bush siding with an international court against his own country is enough to have him impeached wouldnt ya say?
I knew there were some serious Constitutional issues in play and that is not my forte, I make no bones about speaking my mind when I know my ground and that’s why I sent this to everyone I know, I knew there would be some folks that had a much better grasp than I did on this particular subject…
Has that man become the anti Christ?????????????
I read the article. I followed the link and read Bellinger’s speech — a very good one. And then I googled the Mexico vs U.S. case and read the briefs to the court.
The case was brought by Mexico under the Vienna Protocols signed by the U.S. in 1969 — a treaty that both the U.S. and Mexico are co-signatories — although not at the same time. The President, under the Constitution, is required to uphold our country’s laws — including those to which we are committed by treaty.
The case seeks to delay execution of the Mexican nationals pending review of whether they were granted opportunity to contact their Consulate in a timely manner. It does not grant any permanent injunction against their execution, merely a temporary restraint. Based on the expeditious manner in which Texas executes its death row inmates once the execution order is given, it appeared necessary for the President to intervene until the courts could review the situation. Texas’ appeal to the Supreme Court is an expected step in the process. It should expedite a decision rather than leaving it in limbo.
Once review of the cases has been completed concerning the defendants right to recourse to their consular office for counsel, unless mitigating circumstances are brought forward, the executions will proceed as ordered. It is unlikely, given the heinous nature of most of the crimes that the outcome will be any different, merely delayed.
The importance of this entire matter is that if we wish other countries to afford our citizens the right to recourse to our US Consulate in the event of arrest for any type of crime, we must afford foreign nationals with the same rights within our system.
When the Government starts finding illegal invaders hanging from trees and watching riots in the streets of small towns across America on CNN, they might see that securing our border is MUCH more humane.
It’s coming folks, the writing is on the wall and if something don’t change soon there will be a BIGGER mess to clean up than 12 million wetback welfare leeches.
I can understand the point of it being a law but just because something is a law doesnt make it right. Theres a LOT of wrong headed plain ol’ stupid laws on the books. In my home town here in So Cal it is still illegal for a man to kiss a woman in public. This is a left over from the days of the great influenza outbreak of a century ago that killed millions. This law had a valid purpose in its day. But if someone tried to enforce it today they would be lauged at. If it wasnt so serious I would be laughing at Bush for this idiocy.
I’m not surprised in the least, the entire Bush clan is made up of Mex lovers in word and deed. I gave up on Bush when he nominated ‘My Little Crony’ for the USSC. Personally I think that being POTUS has gone to his head in the same way it went to ‘both’ of Bill Clinton’s heads. Having all that power at your fingertips has got to be a super power rush. I’d like to see some of the power of the POTUS curtailed, but I don’t see how that can be done in this day and age. Congress is as useless as tits on a pump-handle at the best of times and worse than that in any real crisis. Someone has to be in charge and unfortunately we have been saddled with two power mad bastards in a row. That will add up to 16 years of mismanagement and corruption. I guess maybe its always been that way and you just notice it more when it happens in your lifetime.
C’mon folks, read with your HEAD and not your HEART, we’ve got Constitutional issues at work here and perhaps GWB did what he had to do, and THAT is the part that needs to be changed…
Think folks, THINK… That’s what this one is ALL about and several very good bloggers have brought the real issue to the forefront…
Thanks, Fred. I’m linking to this post. President Bush has disappointed me mightily and I can hardly be rational when it comes to the president and our borders.
North American Transportation Trilateral…
North American Open Skies Agreement, by Toni and Bear Creek Ledger (cross-posted) Looks like there is a slow chipping away at any of sign of a US border whether it be by land, air or sea. Dr. Jerome Corsi is…
Yeah, it is the gotdam treaty that should never have been signed. I understand the rationale..it is supposed to insure that Americans arrested overseas will get a fair shake before they are hung. Yeah,right.
There is a lot to be said about lynch mobs…sometimes the wrong person got the rope without benefit of an official trial but most of the time it was in fact justice served by the public. I am not advocating a return to lynch mob justice but I do agree that if something is not done soon about the sieve of a southern border murderers such as these in question will never receive benefit of trial other than that of the lynch mob.
GUYK that might be true but it’s hard to imagine a place in the world that has more opportunities for appeals, and cares more about the rights of the Criminal more than the USA some might be about the same but really.
If you know someone has killed a family member and the president will fight to let them go free why not resort to lynch mobs? One of the reasons cave men formed organized communities was for protection. If your society will not protect you its time for a re org.
This, and so many other untenable international situtations is exactly why our wise founding fathers advised us to beware of treaties and foreign entanglements which usually end up biting us on the butt…or even worse!
Thanks for posting this. I’ll link to it.
I’m not a lawyer but I do know a little history, and historically the United States has only enforced those treaties it wanted to enforce. Do the words Native American ring a bell? We violated nearly every treaty with them even though the tribes were recognized as being sovereign nations. That’s just for starters. We have broken treaties or disregarded certain specific terms of treaties ever since we declared ourselves to be a nation.
So has everyone else. Treaties, like rules, “are made to be broken” as the old expression so truthfully goes.
Bush knows this. He can and will disregard anything he wants to disregard, as we have learned so very well. That this particular court case is just to cover some basic formalities and technicalities before the bastards are executed anyway, is good to know, however.
So I guess Bush is off the hook on this one. Why he isn’t swaying in the wind from all his other crimes is something I don’t understand though. Sometimes I think there is entirely too much loyalty within the GOP. He doesn’t deserve it.
Rastaman
http://www.IslamaNazi.com
Is this so surprising, considering the shamnesty bill having no language barring felons and known gang members from gaining citizenship?
Pretty disgusting all the way around…