Anyone else see this as potentially problematic?

[theweaselking]

Article VI of the US Constitution:
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;"

US Supreme Court, Jose Medellin v Texas, 2008:
"While a treaty may constitute an international commitment, it is not binding domestic law unless Congress has enacted statutes implementing it or the treaty itself conveys an intention that it be “self-executing”"

Comments

[elffin.livejournal.com]

... because we don't want to be actually /bound/ by those inconvenient treaties with the Native Americans.

Note to Foreign Countries: Always Include "self-executing" in treaties with the US.

[scifantasy.livejournal.com]

You sound like the dissenting opinion (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-984.ZD.html).

[ladyfox7oaks.livejournal.com]

Yeeeah... I had to read the at least three times to understand - and then it hit me, "Waitaminute... what?!"
OY... There are days I think I want to change my citizenship...

[anton-p-nym.livejournal.com]

Does it bother anybody else that in the majority decision, save only for the case title, the defendant's name is misspelled? It's like they can't even be bothered to consider the guy... which I suppose is technically true, seeing as this is an appellate court, but it's gotta add insult to injury.

-- Steve's getting nervous about visiting the States again. Dammit. Great people in person, but MAN the officials they vote in...

[dreamshade.livejournal.com]

Ah ha ha ha! That wacky Roberts court! Always making judgements and then desperately searching for any reasoning that would validate their opinions!

[thormation.livejournal.com]

It's "interesting" in the same way as the old Chinese proverb about living in "interesting" times.

[ryusen.livejournal.com]

wow awesome and isn't this the judges that claimed to be strict constitutionalists?

[elffin.livejournal.com]

You are looking for Strict Constructionists, and yes, the same judges who claim to be.

[sterlingspider.livejournal.com]

*sigh* We're nothing if not consistent.

[pope-guilty.livejournal.com]

Conservatives loathe the law? I AM SURPRISE

[crataegus.livejournal.com]

"Tripoli is just a piece of paper" in 5, 4, 3, 2...

[lawmaking.livejournal.com]

Well, as I recall my international law class, this decision logically continues US approach to international law: US laws superceed international treaties to which US is a party (as opposed to Russian, for example). Moreover, enforcement of ICJ rulings is always problematic when a country against which the decision is made refuses to cooperate, since there is no mandatory enforcement mechanism in international law. Good example is Nicaragua vs. USA case.

[autobotsrollout.livejournal.com]

Interestingly, the Medellin decision mirrors, to an extent, Canadian constitutional law. Basically, the theory goes as follows: "Okay, we've signed this treaty, but how we choose to follow it is up to us so long as we stick to the spirit of it."

Non-implemented treaties (IE, treaties that have not been explicitly ratified under Canadian law, or where domestic equivalents of international law have not been passed) aren't binding; they're merely persuasive.

Most countries do this; the Medellin decision is noteworthy because the Roberts court is attempting to shift goalposts, as the Vienna Convention is (I am pretty sure) ratified law in the United States.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

#1: Last I checked (and you would, of course, know better than I would), Canada didn't have a constitutional requirement to consider signed treaties as parts of the constitution.

#2: It's repugnant when we ignore treaties and the international arbitrations, too. It just happens less often, in less serious cases, and we don't have an explicit practice of ignoring the rights of foreigners, and locking them up and torturing them without trial.