Did the President overstep his authority in this matter?

Question

MICHAEL GRACZYK
Associated Press

HOUSTON - The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday rejected an appeal from a death row prisoner whose case was among several dozen nationally involving condemned killers who were born in Mexico and whose punishments had been sidetracked after intervention from President Bush.

"We hold that the President has exceeded his constitutional authority by intruding into the independent powers of the judiciary," the court said in a 64-page ruling that included 283 legal footnotes.

Lawyers for condemned murderer Jose Ernesto Medellin had argued his rights were violated when a Houston court tried and sentenced him to death in 1994 for the rape-slayings of two teenage girls.

Specifically, Medellin, who was born in Mexico but who spent most of his life in Texas, contended he was denied legal help under international treaties when he was charged, tried, convicted and condemned for the 1993 slayings of Jennifer Ertman, 14, and Elizabeth Pena, 16, in Houston.

At issue overall was how much weight U.S. courts should give to decisions of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, which ruled the convictions of Medellin and 50 other Mexican-born prisoners violated the 1963 Vienna Convention.

In 1969, the Senate ratified the Vienna Convention, which requires consular access for Americans detained abroad and foreigners arrested in the United States. The Constitution states that U.S. treaties "shall be the supreme law of the land," but does not make clear who interprets them.

In February 2005, Bush unexpectedly ordered new state court hearings for all 51 prisoners, whose cases have stirred tensions with foreign countries over convictions of their citizens in violation of international law.

The Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday said the presidential order "cannot be sustained under the express or implied constitutional powers of the President relied on by Medellin and the United States or under any power granted to the President by an act of Congress cited by Medellin and the United States.

"As such, the President has violated the separation of powers doctrine by intruding into the domain of the judiciary."

The decision Wednesday means Medellin, 31, is not entitled to additional review of his international rights claim.

The Supreme Court 18 months ago, citing the presidential order, rejected Medellin's case and those of the 50 other Mexican nationals on death row in the United States and sent them to their respective state courts for review. That ruling avoided the dispute over whether international law is binding on American courts.

In 2004, the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Texas in a ruling that federal relief for Medellin was barred because he did not file objections at his trial.

In their arguments to the Supreme Court, Medellin's attorneys said his court-appointed trial lawyer was suspended from practicing law for ethics violations during the case, and he failed to call any witnesses during the guilt phase of the trial. Lawyers for Mexico said the country would have made sure Medellin had a competent lawyer had it known about the trial in 1994.

Medellin was supported in his appeal by dozens of countries, legal groups and human rights organizations, as well as former American diplomats and the European Union. Much of the international community is opposed to capital punishment and the execution of Mexican nationals in Texas, the nation's most active death penaltly state, is a particularly touchy point.

Medellin, 18 at the time, was one of six members of a fledgling Houston street gang convicted in the slayings of Pena and Ertman, whose bodies were found four days after they failed to return from a friend's house. The pair had been tortured, raped and strangled. They were attacked as they took a shortcut along some railroad tracks and stumbled on the group drinking beer after initiating a new gang member.

One of Medellin's companions, Derrick Sean O'Brien, also 18 at the time of the slayings, was executed earlier this year.

Evidence showed the girls were gang raped for more than an hour, then were kicked and beaten before being strangled by a belt or shoelaces.

Two others, Efrain Perez and Raul Villarreal, had their death sentences commuted to life in prison when the Supreme Court last year barred executions for those who were 17 at the time of their crimes.

Peter Cantu, described by authorities as ringleader of the gang, remains on death row without an execution date. O'Brien, in a confession, said Medellin was at one end of the belt being pulled around Jennifer Ertman's neck as he yanked on the other.

The sixth person convicted was Medellin's brother, Vernancio, who was 14 at the time and received a 40-year prison term.

Trainerma.., KISS MY ***. Why can't all you wiseasses just not answer the damn question if it bothers you so much. There is nothing about 'hate' in this news article.

Answer 1

I remember hearing about that. It's too bad they didn't execute them all a long time ago. As for Bush, I don't understand whats wrong with him. I've been asking for years why is he so bent on pleasing President Fox and the Mexican government at the expense of these two young girls and their families. Maybe he's thinking about running for president in Mexico after 2008 or maybe he's got a deal worked out with Mexico to hide him, after they go after him for war crimes. Anyway, I'm still distrustful after he tried to allow the port deal to the Saudis. Keep e'm coming girl. I don't care what they say, your making strong points.

Answer 2

Sorry, There was too much lawyer gibberish in the article for it to be understandable. It seems the focus is on due process of the law and how it fits in local, federal, and international venues. If a person goes through due process, then he has had a fair trial. The problem is the average American believes that a fair trial is when the guilty party is punished and the innocent party goes free. This is a moral judgment and not a legal one. Sometimes politics and morals are at opposite ends of the scale.

Politicians spend most their time with jerk knee reactions in response to public opinion. An out cry of "You must do something" results in someone calling for a hearing, getting a consensus.. blah blah blah. Maybe that is why politicians do not make good action figures, because the actions are very difficult to measure. What seems to be an action driven by morality could be just political posturing. What may appear to be a grand gesture on behalf of a foreign national is really a public gesture for the Mexican government in hopes to gain favor in another venue. It is all smoke and mirrors. Society is better without them and the tax payers should not be forced to keep them alive.

Answer 3

Wow Princess, you sound just like my daughter. :-)

You have made a strong case, but do not clarify the following... "In 1969, the Senate ratified the Vienna Convention, which requires consular access for Americans detained abroad and foreigners arrested in the United States." ~~~ Now, are you or the Vienna convention talking about legally resident foreigners or someone that has no right to be in the USA?

Princess, I want you to understand what I am talking about. I was born in Europe went through the whole 9 yards, and had to wait almost 5 years before I was allowed to set a foot in USA. Then it took another 5 years to become a citizen. Now I ask you, should some wet-back crossing the Rio (who could just as easily be a terrorist) have the same rights as me, who worked for it?

Actually Princess, I don't really care and am only doing this for the 2 points. I have dual citizenship, live in the Philippines like a king (average yearly salary is $1,400 [no, no mistake]) so there...

Answer 4

Considering The Fact That While He Was Governor Of Texas
He set the record for the most executions
by any governor in American history

I Would Say It's Completely Out Of Character For Mr. Bush


I Attribute This Inconsistency
To Aggressive Political Pandering
To The Mexican Government By The President





I Wonder When Mr Bush Will Begin Pandering
To The Wishes Of Taxpaying American Citizens

Answer 5

According to the way I read our constitution the Courts are correct. The president is not elected as a judge in a federal court neither does he have authority "supposedly" over their desisions.
Whether this bothers our allies and the Mexican Government I believe they would just have to get over it.

Answer 6

Evidently he did and The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals acted appropriately. Bush has overstepped his authority during much of his presidency. The Military Commissions Act comes to mind.

Answer 7

Bush is out of step with America.

Your question should be

"Why does Bush put priority on the best interest of Mexico and sacrifice the freedoms and security of America?"

I voted for him twice. I am a strong, Conservative. Now, I think he should be impeached.

Answer 8

Democrats want to let them out of prison, and make them take "Sensitivity Classes".
Would Democrats be "overstepping their authority"?

Answer 9

AND we wonder why our Border Patrol Agents are in prison for doing their jobs? Clearly there is a misunderstanding in the Oval Office as to which country our President owes his allegiance!

As far as people who always reply with "GET OVER THE HATE" OR "YOU ARE A RACIST".... they are blithering idiots. Apparent it is OK with them that these two innocent young girls were tortured, raped and murdered. It is OK with these criminal lovers that the families must endure Christmases, birthdays, and all holidays without their daughters.

BUT...oh PLEASE don't be mean to the murderous, vicious, ruthless, illegal criminals!!!!

AH...but I forget, the liberals only have compassion for the criminal and the bully and don't give a damn about the victim.

Stay strong, princess....and keep us informed!

Answer 10

I dont get the people who are getting bent out of shape when you post something that has to do with immigration. good question. i think he overstepped his authority.