On October 10, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Medellin v. Texas, a case that will determine whether President Bush overstepped his authority by ordering state courts to comply with a 2004 International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling. The case involves Texas death row inmate Jose Medellin, one of 51 Mexican foreign nationals who were denied their right to contact Mexican consular officials after their arrest. The ICJ’s 2004 ruling called on U.S. courts to review the cases in light of this treaty violation, but Texas refused to review Medellin’s case and he petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for relief. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case at that time, but before it could be decided, President Bush ordered the respective state courts to provide the review required by the ICJ. The Supreme Court then dismissed Medellin’s case to allow time for this review. Texas courts again refused to grant such a review, claiming that President Bush did not have the power to give such an order. Medellin again appealed to the Supreme Court, which granted certiorari and will now consider the extent of President Bush’s power to order compliance with the ICJ’s ruling. Texas has argued that the Constitution does not give the president direct authority over courts, state or federal, even to have them conduct a hearing. The Bush Administration contends that state courts cannot be allowed to veto treaty obligations and that the president has inherent authority stemming from his unique foreign policy role.

(Dallas Morning News, September 20, 2007). See Foreign Nationals and U.S. Supreme Court.