"The majority also flatly rejected the Bush Administration’s claim that it could make the ICJ decision binding by presidential memorandum. "The president," the majority wrote, "has an array of political and diplomatic means available to enforce international obligations, but unilaterally converting a non-self-executing treaty into a self-executing one is not among them." In short, congressional action was an absolute prerequisite to making the ICJ decision binding. And again, there had been no congressional action taken here. " Findlaw
The chief justice wrote with regard to this case that "The president’s duty is to execute the law, not to make it."
Now, it may be that the specific outcome of this Supreme Court ruling is of interest only to this fellow, Medellin, but the larger point is important.
The Left in this country has been endless in its anticipation of slavish obedience to the president by the "Roberts Court." It did not happen here. Bush, who’s behavior as governor of Texas demonstrated that he is not opposed to capital punishment, wanted Texas to comply with this ICJ decision.
Simple. He wants the US to be the "centerpiece" in a worldwide compassionately conservative imperium. For that to work the US must accept its part in the design. Awkwardly, the American federal system still exists and Texas chose to exercise its sovereignty to reject this decision by the ICJ and the executive branch of the US government.
Roberts, Alito, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas and Stephens all sided with Texas’s rights as a sovereign in this case.
What happened to the slavish obedience that was expected? pl