World Court to rule on US executions

[ThoughtCriminal]

World Court to rule on US executions
By MIKE CORDER, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jul 16, 5:23 AM ET
Article Here

THE HAGUE, Netherlands - The U.N.'s highest court is ruling Wednesday on an emergency Mexican appeal to block the execution of its citizens on death row in the United States.

At hastily convened hearings last month, Mexico argued that the United States is defying a 2004 International Court of Justice order to review the cases of 51 Mexicans sentenced to death by state courts.

That order was based on the Hague-based court's finding that the condemned prisoners had been denied the right to help from their consulate following their arrest.

Wednesday's ruling comes less than three weeks before the first of the death row inmates, Jose Medellin, is scheduled for execution by lethal injection in Texas for taking part in the gang rape and murder of two teenage girls 15 years ago.

At last month's hearings, Mexico's chief advocate Juan Manuel Gomez-Robledo told the court the cases had not been systematically reviewed, and the U.S. was "in breach of its international obligations."

John B. Bellinger III, the U.S. legal adviser, said federal government had gone to "extraordinary lengths" to carry out the World Court's directive and to intercede with the state courts.

After the World Court's ruling, President George W. Bush issued a directive to the state courts to abide by the decision and also asked Texas specifically to review Medellin's case ahead of his planned Aug. 5 execution.

Those steps were "highly unusual," Bellinger said. "It almost never happens that the federal government enters an appearance in state court proceedings."

However, Texas refused, and in March the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 6-3 vote that Bush lacked the authority to compel state courts to comply with the judgment from The Hague.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Attorney General Michael Mukasey have jointly written to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, urging him to review Medellin's case, Bellinger said.

The court will likely base its ruling Wednesday on whether or not it has jurisdiction.

Informally known as the World Court, the tribunal is the U.N.'s judicial arm for resolving disputes among nations. Its decisions are binding and final, but it has no enforcement powers.

[jahwarrior72]

Wednesday's ruling comes less than three weeks before the first of the death row inmates, Jose Medellin, is scheduled for execution by lethal injection in Texas for taking part in the gang rape and murder of two teenage girls 15 years ago...


...After the World Court's ruling, President George W. Bush issued a directive to the state courts to abide by the decision and also asked Texas specifically to review Medellin's case ahead of his planned Aug. 5 execution...


...However, Texas refused, and in March the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 6-3 vote that Bush lacked the authority to compel state courts to comply with the judgment from The Hague..

good for TX! i thought dubya would've known better than to try that nonsense!

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Attorney General Michael Mukasey have jointly written to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, urging him to review Medellin's case, Bellinger said.

The court will likely base its ruling Wednesday on whether or not it has jurisdiction.

Informally known as the World Court, the tribunal is the U.N.'s judicial arm for resolving disputes among nations. Its decisions are binding and final, but it has no enforcement powers.

well, if it has no enforcement powers, i guess it's settled, isn't it?

i just want to know, where does the UN get off telling us how to run our judicial system? it turns a blind eye to sudanese refugees being systematically wiped out, pays no heed to human atrocities china commits on its own people, but because TX is going to clean up the gene pool one scumbag at a time, it's all, "WHOA!!!!! hold the phone, these illegal immigrants in your country have rights!"

this may sound juvenile, but why don't we just get some teamsters from brooklyn, and have them get a crew to knock down the damn UN building, already?

[sluggie24]

Informally known as the World Court, the tribunal is the U.N.'s judicial arm for resolving disputes among nations. Its decisions are binding and final, but it has no enforcement powers.

Does this sound funny to you? They can make a ruling that you can't appeal but they can't make you follow the ruling.........

Why would anyone care what they say then?

[pex]

i just want to know, where does the UN get off telling us how to run our judicial system?

Probably somewhere between our joining and our willful continuance in being there.

[knighthawk06699]

They want all the benefits but none of the rules or consequences?? Sorry guys enjoy the ride. You come in this country and do something that has landed you the death penalty and you are probably(not a guarantee) illegal. Bye bye so long.

[WhiteFeather]

I don’t recognized or accept any so called world court decision anymore than I care who is the world federation wrestling champion.

Our so called treaty with the United Nations is not legal, never has been. We can't have a treaty with organizations like the UN, only treaties with nations or states, with definable borders, common language, common currency not just a freaking organization that all of sudden now has juridication over US above every elected official everywhere.

All treaties have to be in agreement with our Constitution or the treaty has to be changed to be in agreeement before ratification to be legal, its not a quick way to amend or do a reach around our Constitution by just ratifying a treaty. If so we only have to ratify "a treaty" with an organization like national man boy love association and then have that treaty become the "new law of the land" is total BS concept. Lets ratify another treaty with a hand gun control "brady bunch" organization, and no more second amendment, they can then write any firearm law and we all have to obey them because of a treaty with have with their organization over rides our Constitution, see how silly this idea is.

Understand it wasn't written or intended to work that way in article VI, yet that is the way they interpreted now.

GOD help US, if they ever deploy UN peacekeeper soldiers in Amerika to rule over US, many will NOT accept there direct authority over this country.

[ihunt49]

Screw the UN. We need to throw them out of the country and not give them any more funding. They are useless and just as corrupt as our Federal Government.

[knighthawk06699]

Screw the UN. We need to throw them out of the country and not give them any more funding. They are useless and just as corrupt as our Federal Government.

Sir you are 100% wrong!!!!!! They are worse!!!!!

[vic2367]

we should kick the un out of this counrty,,good riddance

[Statkowski]

The World Court can rule however it wants, and it won't change a thing. The World Court deals with national governments. Luckily for us, the several states of the union are still sovereign entities unto themselves and are not bound by any rulings. You'll note the news article states that the federal government had gone to "extraordinary lengths" to carry out the World Court's directive and to intercede with the state courts.

Intercede and overrule are two different things. We have no "national" death sentence except where the federal government has usurped the states' power and authorities and exceeded it power granted to it by the states in the U.S. Constitution.

The states involved can tell both the federal government and the World Court to pound sand.