Posted on 08/10/2008 8:13:47 PM PDT by davidosborne
The execution of José Ernesto Medellín Rojas by the state of Texas is a violation of international law, said Amnesty International today. "It undermines the authority of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which had ruled in favour of a stay of execution."
I don't know. Maybe the part where if Osama Obama gets elected and he and a rubber-stamp Democrat congress pass a law that we are subject to the ICJ, which is not at all impossible, then there you have it.
We made a very big deal about the sanctity of international institutions, indeed we sponsored most of them, from the UN on down, and now we can't get rid of them.
We're still the biggest and richest kid on the block, so we can do whatever we want most of the time, but that won't last forever. Give it a few decades and we'll have UN peace keepers on our turf. I hope I don't live to see it.
What did the guy do and why does the ICJ think they have a say in the case?
I just hope there is a conservative Republican in office the first time the ICJ tries to enforce a decision against a high-profile American. Those lil puffters will be blown out of the water.
Article III, section 1 : "The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish..."
The so-called "international court of justice" has NO authority whatsoever in Texas, or elsewhere in the United States.
IMHO, in order for that to happen there will need to be a LIBERAL PRESIDENT, A 60-vote LIBERAL MAJOIRTY IN THE SENATE, and a 5-4 LIBERAL MAJORITY in the U.S. Supreme Court -— absent that I don’t see it happening -— having said that we are not that far from being there -— another reason we need to get the word out on this — and make this a campaign issue for ANYONE seeking Federal office -— sadly, I have talked to many folks who view the ICJ as having FULL authority OVER the United States Supreme Court — in fact many folks holding Fenderal office have this view — I suggest we initiate IMPEACHMENT proceedings against anyone holding this view — which is clearly in violation of the U.S. Constitution..
David
You have to go back to the debate over the various Bricker amendments and the Reid v. Covert case to get up to speed on this issue.
The central question is, does the supremacy clause in Article VI allow the President and the Senate to amend the Constitution?
Their powers are derived from, delegated by, the People of the United States, from whom sovereignty issues. We have delegated ALL judicial power to a Supreme Court, and such inferior courts as Congress shall from time to time establish. We also provided a system for amending our delegations of sovereign authority, which requires involvement of the House of Representatives and the states.
It is illogical to suppose that our President and our Senate can "end run" our system my making agreements with foreign powers and principalities.
The USSC killed the push for the Bricker Amendment by ruling exactly that in Reid v. Covert in 1957, but I don't think the current USSC would uphold that case in the present time.
It is therefore very important to understand the philosophical basis of our system of government - that the government at Washington, while it exercises some aspects of the sovereign power of the People of the United States, does not embody that sovereignty as do foreign despotisms or even European "democracies" which enjoy power seized from personal sovereigns.
The USSC has NO AUTHORITY, nor does Congress, nor does the President, to disrupt or negotiate away reserved powers which we have assigned to them.
I share the concern of all that this is an issue (the most likely issue, BTW) that we will have to fight over, perhaps in my lifetime.
Why is our government not paying attention to this?
Why is our government not paying attention to this?
Treason is the reason, and should adjudicate with extreme prejudice.
Clearly states cannot continue to ignore the International Court Of Justice. I suggest the UN immediately send in all their troops to quell those unruly Texans.............he he he.
PS...gives a whole new meaning to “Gone to Texas”
Jim,
Thanks for you thougtful reply which I found very helpful. Sorry it took so long to reply.
FReegards,
David
And the International Court of Justice has authority over Texas since WHEN?
Amnesty International.
IOW, one of the communist useful idiot groups.
Amnesty International should have been in India the past two days protesting to the terrorists not to execute innocence.
you might be right... I have read some articles that suggest the execution was in defiance of a “request” by President Bush.. who admitedly stated that he has no authority to compel the State to comply his request... I could not find a good source for that statement though... anyone know anything about that “request” ??It might have to do with assertions that the defendant did not have access to the Mexican consul.
They will probably have worse things to say about us when Texas becomes a country again.
Amnesty International should have been in India the past two days protesting to the terrorists not to execute innocence.That would require real courage.
Take your court and shove it.
We have our own, thank you.
Western common law has worked for near 1000 years, we’re not gonna give it up because a bunch of banana republics want something different.
The International Court of Justice is an anti-American, socialist, entity with not jurisdiction over the USA at all. They can suck eggs for all I care. They are a meaningless organization with delusions of grandeur.
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.