Posted on 11/16/2006 3:10:33 PM PST by kiriath_jearim
Texas can proceed with the execution of a death row inmate notwithstanding a ruling by an international tribunal and a memorandum from President Bush directing state courts to comply with the tribunal’s decision, Texas’ highest court for criminal matters ruled yesterday.
“We hold that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority by intruding into the independent powers of the judiciary,” Judge Michael Keasler wrote for the court, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
The case, which has been considered by the United States Supreme Court, appears quite likely to return there.
In 2004, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled that 51 Mexicans on death row in the United States were entitled to “review and reconsideration” of their claims that their rights under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations had been violated.
The convention requires that arrested foreigners be told of their right to speak with consular officials. If asked, local officials must contact the appropriate consulate. Both actions, the convention says, must be taken “without delay.”
The international court added that American courts performing the required review and reconsideration could not rely on a doctrine known as procedural default to decline to hear arguments not raised at trial. That is at odds with recent death penalty jurisprudence in the United States and with state and federal laws that limit what kinds of arguments may be made if they are not raised early on.
When the question of whether the international tribunal’s ruling must be followed reached the United States Supreme Court last year, President Bush issued a memorandum to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales directing state courts to abide by the decision of the tribunal.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I can. FOr starters, the vaunted vigilante statement was a reaction to a loaded question from a reporter. To paraphrase, "what do you think about people around the border HUTNING illegal immigrants?" Not looking for them, not reporting them to the authorities, HUNTING them. During that entire question and answer seession, no one brought up the Minutemen group at all. Of course the President think that there are a bunch of lunatics going around shooting people, he's going to condemn them as vigilantes.
IF you are still interested, I'll give you more. BUt I really don't see the point if you can't be swayed in the slightest. If you can at least acknowledge that the "vigilante" thing is not in any way shape or form related to the Minutemen, then we have a start.
"The World Court can suck my balls. I only abide by Scottish law."
~Orrin Hatch
YES!
:-)
Nor are they covered by them, except as ILLEGAL COMBATANTS who may be summarily executed. And mostly SHOULD be summarily executed...
BUMP!
Actually, speaking for myself --- No. I don't.
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.