Jose Ernesto Medellin v. Texas (552 U.S. 491)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 25, 2008 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 552 U.S. 491 · 128 S. Ct. 1346
- Decided
- March 25, 2008
- Term
- October Term 2007
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Roberts
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), located in the Hague, is a tribunal established pursuant to the United Nations Charter to adjudicate disputes between member states. In the Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex. v. U. S.), 2004 I. C. J. 12 (Judgment of Mar. 31) (Avena), that tribunal considered a claim brought by Mexico against the United States. The ICJ held that, based on violations of the Vienna Convention, 51 named Mexican nation als were entitled to review and reconsideration of their state-court convictions and sentences in the United States. This was so regardless of any forfeiture of the right to raise Vienna Convention claims because of a failure to comply with generally applicable state rules governing challenges to criminal convictions. In Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 548 U. S. 331 (2006) — issued after Avena but involving individuals who were not named in the Avena judgment — we held that, contrary to the ICJ's determination, the Vienna Convention did not preclude the application of state default rules. After the Avena decision, President George W. Bush determined, through a Memorandum for the Attorney General (Feb. 28, 2005), App. to Pet. for Cert. 187a (Memorandum or President’s Memorandum), that the United States would “discharge its international obligations” under Avena “by…
Excerpt of a 73,327-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.