High court cool to Bush claim on death cases

The conservative-leaning Supreme Court has been seen as a friendly forum for claims of broad presidential power. But on Wednesday, President Bush’s lawyers got a cool reception for their claim that the chief executive can tell states to reopen the death sentences of dozens of Mexican nationals.

Two years ago, in something of a surprise, Bush ordered Texas judges to take a new look at the case of Jose Medellin, a Houston murderer who was born in Mexico. The president, who has been a staunch proponent of the death penalty since his days as governor of Texas, took that unexpected position to enforce a ruling won by the Mexican government before the International Court of Justice in the Hague.

In arguing the Medellin case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday, a lawyer for the state of Texas insisted Bush had overplayed his hand. Most of the justices -- including Bush’s own appointees -- appeared to agree.

“This is a very curious assertion of presidential power,” said Texas Solicitor General R. Ted Cruz, since the chief executive has no legal authority to tell Texas judges how to do their jobs. “This court has the final authority to determine what federal law is,” he added.

Not surprisingly, that argument won favor. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Antonin Scalia said the Supreme Court -- not the international court or the president -- has the ultimate power to decide whether the terms of treaties are binding law within the U.S.

“I’m rather jealous of that power,” Scalia said. “It belongs in this court.”

The case of Medellin vs. Texas offers a rich mix of legal questions and strange bedfellows.

On one side, Bush is allied with a lawyer who is trying to win a new hearing for Medellin.

At the same time, the court’s liberal justices, who are usually skeptical of broad claims of presidential power, seemed most supportive of Bush’s order in this case.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer said that when the United States enters into international treaties, including free-trade pacts, it agrees to be bound by the terms of those agreements.

At one point, Breyer read a passage from the Constitution that says “all Treaties made. . . . under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land, and judges in every state shall be bound thereby.” When he came to the words “in every state,” he paused to say, “I guess it means, including Texas.”

That passage would seem to cover this case, he said.

In 1969, the Senate ratified the Vienna Convention, a treaty under which the nations agreed they would notify one another when one of their citizens “is arrested or committed to prison.” In its suit before the world court, the government of Mexico alleged U.S. officials failed to comply with that duty, and it pointed to 51 Mexican nationals on death row, including 28 in California.

While ruling for Mexico, the international court did not say precisely what must be done. Instead, it said the United States should “provide, by means of its own choosing, review and reconsideration of the convictions and sentences” of the Mexican nationals.

Bush’s order applied only to Texas.

However, if the Supreme Court were to rule for Medellin, the decision could force California judges to take another look at the cases of the Mexican nationals named in the international court ruling.

It is also not clear what Mexican authorities would have done had they been notified when the various men were arrested. Medellin was arrested for the rape and killing of two teenage girls in 1993, and he soon waived his Miranda rights and gave a detailed confession.

Cruz noted that while Medellin was born in Mexico, he had lived in the United States since he was 3.

Most of the justices signaled they were inclined to rule for Texas and to say neither Bush nor the international court can require states to reopen old cases.

“The president espousing the judgment [of the international court] has no legal effect,” Scalia said. “It’s not a directive to the states.”

--

david.savage@latimes.com