Supreme Court rejects Bush's claim on death cases

[one...two...tree 2,762]

By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court dealt President Bush a defeat today and ruled that he does not have the "unilateral authority" to force state officials to comply with international treaties.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts said the Constitution gives the president the power "to execute the laws, not make them." Unless Congress passes a law to enforce a treaty, the president usually cannot do it on his own, Roberts said.

The case decided today arose from an unusual dispute and an unexpected intervention by Bush. But the justices used it to make a strong statement about the limits of presidential power.

The International Court of Justice in the Hague, acting on a suit by Mexico, ruled that the United States had failed to carry out its treaty duty to inform a native country when one of its citizens was arrested and charged with a serious crime. The decision pointed to 51 Mexican nationals who were under death sentences in Texas, California and several other states.

It was unclear how this ruling could be enforced. But in a surprise move in 2005, Bush told Texas officials they must reopen and reconsider the cases of the Mexican-born murderers on death row. Bush, a former Texas governor, said he was acting "pursuant to the authority vested in me as president by the Constitution and laws of the United States."

Texas officials refused to go along with Bush's order, and they fought him in court.

In today's 6-3 decision, the high court sided with the Texas prosecutors.

Roberts said the treaty known as the Vienna Convention was not "binding federal law" because Congress had not passed a law to enforce it. And the president cannot do this on his own, the chief justice said.

"The president's authority to act, as with the exercise of any governmental power, must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself," Roberts said. "We therefore conclude, given the absence of congressional legislation, that the non-self-executing treaties at issue here did not expressly or impliedly vest the president with the unilateral authority to make them self-executing," he said.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined Roberts' opinion. And Justice John Paul Stevens concurred in the result.

The dissenters, led by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, took the view that treaties become part of American law and must therefore be followed by state and federal officials.

The ruling in Medellin vs. Texas is a complete defeat for the Mexican nationals on death row. They have no right to further hearings, the high court said, once their appeals have been rejected by state and federal judges.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...0,1898642.story

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Roberts said the treaty known as the Vienna Convention was not "binding federal law" because Congress had not passed a law to enforce it. And the president cannot do this on his own, the chief justice said.

Sounds reasonable to me. So when is Congress going to pass this law?

[GaryC 7]

Interesting, so if Bush tries to uphold an international treaty and he gets shot down he is "dealt a defeat"? Is this the same press that blasts Bush when he ignores international treaties?

[almaty 19]

Bush was trying to do what he felt was in the best interest of america..texas is texas and suxs