Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 238

Thread: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

  1. #81
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    If an American raped and murdered 2 little girls in come country, would you oppose that country, according to its laws, executing that American?
    You are ignoring the issue. THe issue is NOT the execution of a scumbag. The issue is that scumbag did NOT have access to consular officials.

    If an American committed a similar crime in another country, I would hope that he would be tried in accordance with the laws of that country, but I would also expect the host country to abide by their obligations and permit him access to U.S. consular personnel.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  2. #82
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Breaking treaties and failing the respect the rights of the accused in unacceptable, even if the man is clearly guilty of terrible crimes. This man should have been granted access to his consulate, then tried convicted and sentenced. The system fouled up, and it put Americans abroad in danger.

  3. #83
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by Binary_Digit View Post
    I find it hard to believe that an administrative error in any way nullifies our obligation to abide by signed treaties in good faith, and I find it hard to believe that you would take such a position.
    SCOTUS made it clear that we were not in violation of the relevant treaties.

    Medellín v. Texas

    Optional Protocol Treaty:
    "The Protocol says nothing about the effect of an ICJ decision and does not itself commit signatories to comply with an ICJ judgment. The Protocol is similarly silent as to any enforcement mechanism."

    Article 94 of the United Nations Charter:
    It reads: "[e]ach Member of the United Nations undertakes to comply with the decision of the [ICJ] in any case to which it is a party."

    SCOTUS: "It does not provide that the United States 'shall' or 'must' comply with an ICJ decision, nor indicate that the Senate that ratified the U. N. Charter intended to vest ICJ decisions with immediate legal effect in domestic courts. Instead, '[t]he words of Article 94 . . . call upon governments to take certain action.' (Committee of United States Citizens Living in Nicaragua v. Reagan). In other words, the U. N. Charter reads like 'a compact between independent nations' that 'depends for the enforcement of its provisions on the interest and the honor of the governments which are parties to it.' (Head Money Cases.)"

    "Second, as the President and Senate were undoubtedly aware in subscribing to the U. N. Charter and Optional Protocol, the United States retained the unqualified right to exercise its veto of any Security Council resolution."

    "Given that ICJ judgments may interfere with state procedural rules, one would expect the ratifying parties to the relevant treaties to have clearly stated their intent to give those judgments domestic effect, if they had so intended. Here there is no statement in the Optional Protocol, the U. N. Charter, or the ICJ Statute that supports the notion that ICJ judgments displace state procedural rules."

    Medellín v. Texas 552 U.*S. ____ -- US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez

    Treaties are only good when Congress enacts legislation to fulfill the agreements, or when the treaty itself is self-executing. The relevant treaties, Optional Protocol, U.N. Charter, and the ICJ Statute, were not self-executing and no legislation was implemented.

  4. #84
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    People losing a debate start changing the subject, question and anything else to divert attention.
    Then again, some people start a debate by asking the wrong question.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  5. #85
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Actually, it does. When the suspect was first arrested, he never told authorities he wanted Mexico notified. It was after sentencing that the UN asked Texas to review this case, amongst others, and demanded that the execution NOT be carried out. Texas said no. It is really a matter of Sovereignty at this point. Which laws do I consider most important? The laws of the United States, or the laws of the UN? The answer here is a no-brainer.

    In Texas, we execute those who rape and kill children, so non-citizens who might be contemplating such an act are now advised that the UN won't be able to pull their asses out of the fire, should they do that and get caught.
    However, the Mexican was apparently never notified of his right to contact Mexican consular officials. That being the case, the State of Texas violated his rights in accordance with accords that the United States is a party to.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  6. #86
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    The UN has no authority over the US.
    But the US has an obligation to adhere to its own international obligations and agreements.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  7. #87
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I have no problem with that. However, the UN does not have the right to demand that we stop the wheels of justice in order to correct an administrative error.
    Umm, yes it does is the rights of the accused were clearly violated - which they were. What is wrong with following the law, THEN frying the guy?
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  8. #88
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    But the US has an obligation to adhere to its own international obligations and agreements.
    Exactly what international obligation or agreement did we violate?

  9. #89
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    Breaking treaties and failing the respect the rights of the accused in unacceptable, even if the man is clearly guilty of terrible crimes. This man should have been granted access to his consulate, then tried convicted and sentenced. The system fouled up, and it put Americans abroad in danger.
    Exactly. How can the U.S. accuse others of not meeting their international obligations when the U.S. itself doesn't?
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  10. #90
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: US breached order by executing Mexican: UN court

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex View Post
    Treaties are only good when Congress enacts legislation to fulfill the agreements, or when the treaty itself is self-executing. The relevant treaties, Optional Protocol, U.N. Charter, and the ICJ Statute, were not self-executing and no legislation was implemented.
    The U.S. is in clear violation of the Vienna Convention. If the U.S. ratifies a treaty, it is obligated to follow it. If it does not, it is in violation of the agreement it made, which is a clear violation of international law.

    How can the U.S. expect OTHERS to maintain their international responsibilities and agreements when the U.S. itself won't?
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

Page 9 of 24 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •