The Spectacle Blog

What Respecting International Institutions Entails

By on 7.17.08 | 3:15PM

Boy, Texas isn't going to like this much. There are apparently five Mexican nationals on death row in Texas whom Mexico feels didn't receive a fair trial. They took it to the World Court, which agreed. The Bush Administration, too, agreed, and pledged cooperation. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, was not keen on forcing Texas to accept the international court ruling. Thus, Mexico returns to the World Court and:

The dispute, argued Mexico, was over just how far the U.S. had to go in trying to enforce the ruling. It was Mexico's understanding that "other federal and state authorities" had to try to enforce the ruling.

In today's ruling, the World Court aligned itself with Mexico, ruling that a dispute did, in fact, still exist. Therefore, it could (and would) take the opportunity to clarify its earlier ruling. Apparently it will soon - all it said today is that the U.S. was required to "take all measures necessary" to halt the executions. And what does that mean? Well, the World Court is apparently planning to rule "with all possible expedition."

I think I'm beginning to understand the internationalist perspective now: Invading Iraq, bad. Invading Texas, good. I'm not sure what time the Alamo closes on weekdays, but I encourage our Lone Star state readers to look into it soon.

Like this Article

Print this Article

Print Article

More Articles From Shawn Macomber