Bush Sides With Mexican Killers Against U.S.
By Cliff Kincaid
June 12, 2007
The State Department’s top legal adviser told international lawyers on June 6 that President Bush is so committed to the primacy of international law that he has taken his home state of Texas to court on behalf of a group of Mexican killers. The Mexicans had been sentenced to death for murdering U.S. citizens, including young children.
John B. Bellinger III, legal adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, cited the case, Mexico v. United States of America, in trying to convince the attorneys that the administration is doing what it can to enforce international law in U.S. courts.
In the case, Bush has come down on the same side as the U.N.’s International Court of Justice (ICJ), which ruled 14-1 on behalf of Mexico against the U.S. The ICJ was headed at the time by a judge from communist China, who also ruled against the U.S.
Bellinger’s extraordinary speech, coming at a time when Bush is under fire for failing to protect America from a Mexican invasion of illegal aliens, demonstrates how the President has been working on behalf of Mexican interests–in this case, convicted Mexican killers claiming their “rights” were violated under a treaty–against the interests of his own nation. When the implications of the Mexico v. United States case are widely known, it can only further harm the administration’s chances for an amnesty-for-illegal-aliens bill.
Conservatives have shown, through derailing the bill, that they are not content to play dumb or go to sleep when the issue involves American sovereignty.
Kincaid goes on to say……………
Many Americans are not aware that the Mexico v. United States case, also known as the Avena decision, was decided against the U.S. by the U.N.’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) and that the Bush Justice Department sided with the ICJ. What’s more, the Bush Justice Department took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court in order to force U.S. states to legally recognize the “rights” of Mexicans who kill Americans on U.S. soil. A decision from the Supreme Court is pending.
The case was taken to the ICJ by the government of Mexico on behalf of 51 of its citizens who had carried out these murders in the U.S. The argument advanced by Mexico on behalf of the killers was that they were not afforded a timely opportunity to meet with Mexican representatives in the U.S. known as consular officers. This was said to be required under the Vienna Convention.
Current figures show 124 foreign nationals on death row in the U.S. Fifty-five of those are from Mexico. Most of them are on death row in California or Texas.
Kincaid continues ……………..
How did the President do this? On February 28, 2005, Bush simply made a “determination” and assumed the power to tell the states what to do.
He declared, “I have determined, pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States, that the United States will discharge its international obligations under the decision of the International Court of Justice in the Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America), 2004 I.C.J. 128 (Mar. 31), 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.”
The Bush Justice Department argued that the president has the power to do whatever he wants to do. “In particular circumstances, the President may decide that the United States will not comply with an ICJ decision and direct a United States veto of any proposed Security Council enforcement measure,” it said. “Here, however, the President has determined that the foreign policy interests of the United States justify compliance with the ICJ’s decision.”
But Bush’s home state of Texas decided that Bush did not have that power.
Here is the International Court of Justice Press Release 2004/16. And here’s additional information at FindLaw, including a link to the actual judgement of the court, as well as the individual opinions of the justices.
.
Wild Thing’s comment…………
Before I would have had a very difficult time believing this. But after Bush verbally attacked his conservative base for wanting him (Bush) and the rest of our leaders to obey our existing laws on immigration, his lack of passion to get the fence built and his non existence of making sure our borders are secure……….well, reading this article only adds to my concern about what on earth is he doing???? This is an outrage to the max!!!!
Regarding Bush and his dedication to giving Amnesty to illegals, there are multiple possibilities why he is doing it, and what the end game is. But rest assured it is not to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Nor is it intended to benefit American citizens.
And then there are also the Border Patrol Agents, Campeon and Ramos are left twisting in the wind.
I lived in Texas for a few years, Dallas, Texas. That is where I met Bob Hope while I was in a show at SMU and he asked me to go to Vietnam with his tour to entertain the troops. I have many fond memories of living there. It is a great State and the people that live there are the some of the friendliest I have ever met in all the places I have lived.
They love America and are very patriotic, they appreciate our military and are vedry aware of the cost of our Freedom. Everything there is bigger then life in so many ways.Even writing that has me with a big smile on my face.
In thinking about all the things I mention now, and how when Bush was elected he was a Texan, and now he is something else.
Recent Comments