Big Win For Texas!

[rev214]

Coverage here

Big win for U.S. Sovereignty and states rights as well...
A slap at the World Court and the Open-Borders crowd...

Portions of the story:

The Supreme Court, in a sweeping rejection of claims of power in the presidency, ruled 6-3 on Tuesday that the President does not have the authority to order states to relax their criminal procedures to obey a ruling of the World Court. The decision came in the case of Medellin v. Texas (06-984). Neither a World Court decision requiring U.S. states to provide new review of criminal cases involving foreign nationals, nor a memo by President Bush seeking to enforce the World Court ruling, preempts state law restrictions on challenges to convictions, the Court said in a ruling written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.

The decision, aside from its rebuff of presidential power, also treats the World Court ruling itself as not binding on U.S. states, when it contradicts those states’ criminal procedure rules. The international treaty at issue in this dispute — the Vienna Convention that gives foreign nationals accused of crime a right to meet with diplomats from their home country — is not enforceable as a matter of U.S. law, the Roberts opinion said. And the World Court ruling seeking to implement that treaty inside the U.S. is also not binding, and does not gain added legal effect merely because the President sought to tell the states to abide by the decision, the Court added.

[DCChris]

F the world court! What is this thing anyway? Why would we be bound by anything decided in the world court? No one else seems to pay attention to the rules, but the United States always turns out to be the bad guys when it's found that we've violated some half ass rule. Let's ask the Germans, Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Russians, Chinese what their take on the Geneva Convention is? Ask a POW from any of our wars what a swell bunch of guys they were, how well they were treated. When the rest of the world comes up with a system that works better than ours, I'll listen. Until then....FUGGUM!!

[sjl127]

Bush sides with the world court... He must be pissed to be dissed like this.

[knight0334]

The likes of other countries dont obey the "world court", why should we??


Why do you think the US went in to Iraq? ..because of Hussein's violations of the UN and the world court - despite what you oil/terror/daddydeeds theory peepz think.

phuck the world court, phuck NATO, phuck the UN

Treaties may be "law of the land", but they cannot be in violation of the US Constitution, because only through the USC does the US signers of the treaty have the authority to make such agreements.

[LorDiego01]

Why should we care what the UN, the World Court, or any of those a-hole groups say.

We never voted for them. They are not our elected officials. End of story.

[pex]

We elected people who then elected our sovereignty away. Do any of you suggest that it is impossible to elect our sovereignty away?