Am I behind the curve or is this story not getting nearly enough attention?
WASHINGTON (AP) – Foreign murder suspects have no rights in U.S. federal courts to challenge their convictions on the grounds they were improperly denied legal help from their consulates, the Supreme Court was told Monday in a case testing the effect of international law in death penalty cases.
Justices heard arguments in the case of Jose Medellin, who says his rights under a U.S. treaty were violated when a Texas court tried and sentenced him to death in 1994 without giving him consular access.
Several of the justices showed little interest in deciding for now the impact of that treaty on domestic cases, particularly after President Bush last month ordered new state court hearings for Medellin and 50 other Mexicans on death row.
The emphasis is mine. It seems to me that this issue presents serious problems in questions of presidential power, separation of powers, and federalism to mention just a few.
Article VI of the U. S. Constitution reads in part:
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; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
As Chief Executive it would seem that the President must have the power to enforce “the supreme law of the land”. If he doesn’t, who does? Specifically, does the President have the power to order state courts to review cases? If he doesn’t, doesn’t this render the treaty unenforceable?
How far does this power extend? In the case of an international treaty on greenhouse gas emissions does the president have the power to close coal-burning power stations by fiat? Order certain vehicles from the road? Where does the power stop?
Shouldn’t U.S. Service Personnel and Veterans get back those Constitutional Rights that they die for and convicted rapists and murderers keep?
Convicted rapists and murderers are given protection from human experiments by the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, Amendment Eight. In 1992 the U.S. Senate signed and ratified the United Nation, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).[3] Its 1994 Index, “… Article 7 – Freedom from Torture, or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.†notes that, “Written policy and practice prohibit the use of†[prison] “inmates for medical…..experiments.â€! Nineteen (19) times cited are the U.S. Constitution plus its Eighth Amendment’s no cruel and unusual punishment.
“The Feres Doctrine should not be applied for military personnel who are harmed by inappropriate human experimentation when informed consent has not been given.†Then, “During the last 50 years, hundreds of thousands of military personnel†were subjected to “experiments that were designed to harmâ€, i.e., the 1994 U.S. Senate Report’s biological and chemical agents, radiation exposure, hallucinogenic and investigational drugs, experimental vaccines and behavior modification projects.[5] In 2011 still ignored is this and their also noted past and present, “III. Findings and conclusions”, “K. DOD and DVA have repeatedly failed to provide information and medical followup to those who participate in military research…” and “N. Participation in military research is rarely included in military medical records, making it impossible to support a veteran’s claim for service-connected disabilities from military research.” This is the withheld needed for diagnosis and treatment but experiment identifying evidence. Underlying this Senate Report is the General Accounting Office (GAO) Sept. 1994 U.S. House Report, “Human Experimentation Overview on Cold War Era Programsâ€![4]
In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1950 Feres case a death due to a 1947 Army barracks fire was determined to be an “incident to serviceâ€.[1] In the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1987 STANLEY a DOD 1958 “to harm†drug experiment is swept under the same cover of “injuries that `arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service.â€[2] FIFTY (50) TIMES it cites the Feres Doctrine. Not once mentioned is the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, Amendment Eight! Thereby, incidentally lost are those U.S. Constitutional Rights that convicted rapists and murders keep!
In 2005 some in Congress made an attempt to get the biological and chemical portion of this withheld needed for treatment evidence, e.g., H.R. 4259 the “Veterans’ Right to Know Commission.†It died! It is now a from 1944, 67 years of U.S. Congressional talk with no Feres Doctrine [1] and its STANLEY [2] “to harm†correction. During the 1994 reported past, hundreds of thousands of the “to harm” service records were destroyed in a 1973 National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) fire. Then Congress’s 1974 Privacy Act censored experiment verifying witnesses from any surviving and future records! Overlooked by many in Congress is their Oath of Office to defend the U.S. Constitution, our “Pledge of Allegiance†“with liberty and justice for all”, their U.S. Constitution Eighth Amendment protection of convicted rapists and murderers [3] with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ignored, carved in stone over its entrance, “EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAWâ€!
As in the GAO and U.S. Senate’s reported past, these “military research†[5] “incident to service†[1] activities are conducted under the ongoing secrecy cover of our ‘national interests’, e.g., WWII, Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, Iraq and Afghanistan. Do not the U.S. Senate’s stated Department of Defense (DOD) “EXPERIMENTS THAT WERE DESIGNED TO HARM†[5] continue? Please hold your members in the U.S. Congress accountable for giving back to those that serve their Constitutional Rights!
David Marshall
REFERENCES:
[1] 1950 – Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135, 146 (1950). http://supreme.justia.com/us/340/135/case.html
[2] 1987 – U.S. SUPREME COURT, JUNE 25, 1987, U.S. V. STANLEY , 107 S. CT.. 3054 (VOLUME 483 U.S., SECTION 669, PAGES 699 TO 710). http://supreme.justia.com/us/483/669/case.html
[3] 1994 – U.S. State Dept., “U.S. Report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights July 1994, Article 7 – Freedom from Torture, or Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.†See “Index of “1994 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”
[4] 1994 – GAO September 28, 1994 “Human Experimentation Overview on Co1d War Era Programs†[PDF] T-NSIAD-94-266 archive.gao.gov/t2pbat2/152601.pdf
[5] 1994 – December 8, 1994 REPORT 103-97 “Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans’ Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century.” Hearings Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, 103rd Congress 2nd Session.