A US Supreme Court case that got very little attention may be returning us  
to the days of the substantial state's rights our Virginia ancestors  intended.
 
In Medellin v. Texas, Mr. Medellin, a Mexican, killed two young women in  
Texas and was convicted of murder.  His lawyers appealed to the World  Court 
arguing that the Vienna Convention (to which the US is a signatory)  required 
Texas to allow Mr. Medellin to contact the Mexican consulate before his  trial.  
The World Court agreed and required the US to give Mr. Medellin a  new trial.  
The Bush Administration ordered Texas to do so.  Texas  refused and set up the 
gas chamber for Mr. Medellin.  The Bush  Administration appealed to the US 
Supreme Court.
 
The Court found for Texas, citing the fact, among others, that states  have a 
substantial amount of sovereignty granted by the Constitution  and may not 
necessarily be bound by all national obligations such as  international 
treaties.   States have rights, and the Federal  government has to respect them. 
 
Thus, it appears that the Roberts' Court feels that the state's rights need  
to be protected.  Does this include secession?  In an era of red  and blue 
states, and contentious politics, this is an important case  interpreting the 
Constitution. 
 
J South



**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.  
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out!      
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000001)

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html