« Informed perspectives on the closing clemencies of the Bush Administration | Main | "The folly of native sentencing circles" »

January 19, 2009

Split outcome in World Court assessment of US death penalty involving foreign nationals

This AP article provides the highlights of a new ruling from the World Court concerning the administration of the death penalty in the US.  Here are the details:

The International Court of Justice ruled Monday that the United States defied its order last year when authorities in Texas executed a Mexican convicted of rape and murder.

The U.N.'s highest court said the U.S. remains obliged to review the cases of about 50 other Mexicans on death row because they were denied access to their consulate after they were arrested. But it rejected Mexico's request that Washington guarantee that each case will be reviewed and reconsidered.

Both Mexico and the United States said they were satisfied with elements of the decision. "It was a mixed result," said John Bellinger III, the legal adviser to the U.S. State Department.

He said the court refused Mexico's main request to spell out the U.S. obligations toward the arrested Mexican nationals, which likely would have led to heightened demands on the U.S. courts. But he was "disappointed" the tribunal declined to acknowledge efforts by the Bush administration to comply with international law and with the court's order.

The Mexican government applauded the ruling in a statement and urged U.S. President-elect Barack Obama to "take concrete actions" to comply with the ruling and "respect the rights of all Mexican nationals."

Thanks to this post at How Appealing, everyone can access at this link the press release that the International Court of Justice issued today, and can access today's ruling at this link.

UPDATE:  Lyle Denniston has this post about the ruling, titled "World Court: U.S. execution broke global law."

January 19, 2009 at 09:36 PM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Split outcome in World Court assessment of US death penalty involving foreign nationals:


Good thing these International Courts don't apply to America. It would take a constitutional amendment for such a court to ever have legal power over America's government and citizens. And I hope no such amendment ever occurs.

About 15 hours from now, Bush will be gone, and America will once again stand for justice and equality - the beacon of freedom and liberty and rule of law will be turned back on and will shine once again, giving direction to the rest of the world. If the democrats had any balls, they'd prosecute Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Ashcroft, Rice and Rove, to show the world in an unequivocal manner that America once again stands for justice. Unfortunately, the democrats don't have such balls, and the "one problem at a time" fallacy would be used as an argument against prosecuting the Bush administration ("we should be focused on fixing the economy, not punishing political mistakes!" - like we can't do both at the same time).

Even during the lawlessness of the Bush years, "International Courts" can suck my balls. The only law that matters is the U.S. Constitution. Not the baseless opinions of anti-american, jew-hating communist foreigners.

It sure does suck to be libertarian... I'm surrounded by fools on all sides.

Posted by: BruceM | Jan 19, 2009 10:15:55 PM

I have to applaud for BruceM's remarkable combination of self-congratulation and self-pitying tosh.

That said, I do agree in that the Democrats will do nothing to give effect to the ICJ's edicts. After all, Medellin was not the first case of its kind. During the Clinton Administration, the states of Arizona and Virginia executed several foreign nationals despite ICJ whining. The issue was not resolved then. Don't expect it to be resolved any time soon.

President Bush will leave office soon, but Chief Justice Roberts is expected to serve until 2030 or so.

Posted by: realist | Jan 20, 2009 1:06:12 AM

Democrats are more likely to give effect to "world court" edicts than Republicans. Republicans flip out and start cackling, banging their chests, and throwing feces all over the place if a federal court so much as cites an international source as persuasive authority. Democrats, deep down inside, typically get warm and fuzzy inside when they think about "world courts" where a rainbow of people of all different colors and religious - DIVERSITY! - get together and form a "world government" where we all can get along (as socialists). Then Republicans start to yell and scream even louder, throwing even more dung, over the creation of a one-world government "New World Order" lead by the Antichrist who will force all white Christian Americans to have the Mark of the Beast placed on them (cuz thuh Baaahble sez so!).

And that summarizes the Democrat/Republican dichotomy of opinions on America giving jurisdiction to the "World Court" over our government and our citizens. As always, I'm happy to provide you with a modern civics lesson.

Posted by: BruceM | Jan 20, 2009 3:04:59 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB