The Constitution makes no distinctions as to who receives the benefits of Constitutional rights. The restrictions on the government infringing on people's rights are universal within the jurisdiction of the United States.
The fact that he has broken the law does not remove the government's obligation to respect his inalienable rights.
He's not due the same treatment. He apparently is entitled to far more legal rights than a citizen.
The whole point of why the State Department is supporting his appeal before the Supreme Court is that we want to insure the same right for Americans to get help from the American consulate if they are arrested while abroad.
How can we expect other countries to respect the rights of our citizens to seek such aid, if we don't respect the rights of their citizens to do the same?
If this slimeball's appeal is successful, he will get a new trial and another day in court. He isn't receiving any more rights or protections than any US citizen would receive, and the whole point is to guarantee the rights of American's traveling abroad.
Was Medellin prohibited from contacting the Mexican consulate? The Mexican government obviously knew about this from the start. Where were they at the start? Did he tell anyone that he was a Mexican national? He is being granted special rights because he is a Mexican citizen. Bush has sold us out to Mexico at every chance. This is just another example.