[KantianBurke]

Err, no.

“Bush said he disagreed with the international court’s conclusions, but agreed to comply with them. In a February 28, 2005, executive order, he said, “The United States will discharge its international obligations ... 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.”

His call. And lets not forget, Rice works at the pleasure of the President. She’s nothing more than his State Dept rep / mouthpiece. If she were going off on her own initiative, she’d be fired pretty damn quick. This was Bush’s call and shame on him for it.

[A Navy Vet]

"This was Bush’s call and shame on him for it."

No shit! This man has been the biggest disappointment of my political involvement. He's done a "few" good things, but mostly caved to the Dims while forwarding his NWO agenda.

[sam_paine]

Bush said [as POTUS], “The United States will discharge its international obligations ... by having state courts give effect to the decision

Aliens' Rights Are Issue in Texas Death Row Case
By RICK LYMAN Published: December 8, 1998

''There is a golden rule,'' Mr. Warren said. ''If the United States expects the rights of its citizens to be protected abroad, it must provide those rights to foreigners in the United States. This is not rocket science. And the U.S. State Department is painfully aware, I think, that they are on very thin ice.''

Governor Bush [in 1998] said he would make no final decision on Mr. Faulder's execution until a recommendation from the Texas Board of Paroles and Pardons and saw no need for giving the board more time the issue. ''In general, I will uphold the laws of the State of Texas, regardless of the nationality of the person involved,'' he said. ''People can't just come into our state and cold-blood murder somebody. That's unacceptable behavior.''

Governor Bush, a strong supporter of the death penalty, has generally acceded to the recommendations of his parole board, which has not shown itself inclined toward clemency in death penalty cases.

Seems to me, like in a Republic...Bush did the right thing for the state of Texas when he was governor, and he upheld the laws/treaties of the US as POTUS.

The Texas Supreme Court overruled Bush initially in the 1998 case, but he stuck with it and upheld the laws of the State as Governor and Faulder was executed 6 mos later.

Both criminals are dead with due State and Federal process....what do you want...county lynchings instead?

[yazdankurd]

But we can be more than half-full grateful that the Roberts Court this week decided 6-3 for American sovereignty in the Medellin v. Texas decision. In 1993, Jose Medellin, an illegal Mexican immigrant, raped and murdered two teenage girls in Houston, for which he was sentenced to death by a Texas jury.

Then the government of Mexico and Medellin’s shyster lawyers began arguing the verdict should be set aside because he wasn’t told of his supposed right (via a treaty, not any US law) to talk to the Mexican consulate at the time of his arrest. The International Court of Justice ruled in Mexico’s favor. The Supreme Court ruled on Monday (3/24) that the sovereign state court of Texas could ignore the ICJ ruling.

Liberals bleated that it was a “disgraceful defeat for international law,” but it really was a defeat for Condi Rice, who sweet-talked the President into signing an Executive Order demanding Texas enforce the ICJ ruling. The Supreme Court’s decision voided that EO. For Condi, “repairing damaged relations with the international community” by siding with the ICJ was more important than the sovereignty of American law.

Condi lost, the libs lost, our sovereignty won, and Jose Medellin will die as he deserves by lethal injection. Good news all the way around.

Jack Wheeler
tothepointnews.com