Medellin v. Texas: International Justice, Federalism, and the Execution of Jose Medellin

In 1993, José Medellín, an eighteen-year-old Mexican national who lived in the United States, was arrested for his involvement in the gang rape and murder of two girls in Houston, Texas. The Mexican government filed suit against the United States in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which ruled that the United States had violated the rights of both Mexico and Medellín. Medellín sought a writ of habeas corpus, which was denied by the lower courts. He petitioned for a writ of certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted twice. Despite a nearly universal belief among court watchers and legal scholars that Texas would lose, the Court in a 6-3 decision ruled in favor of Texas and against Medellín in June 2008. Medellín was executed just two months later. This book explores the story of Medellín v. Texas, showing how the Courts 2008 ruling grappled with the complex question of how a united republic that respects the dual sovereignty of its constituent parts struggles to comply with its international obligations. It also explores the international human rights and the anomalous position of the United States regarding the death penalty compared to other nations.

Format: Paperback / softback
Length: 216 pages
Publication date: 31 August 2022
Publisher: University Press of Kansas

In 1993, José Medellín, an eighteen-year-old Mexican national who resided in the United States for most of his life, faced charges for his involvement in the gang rape and murder of two girls in Houston, Texas. Despite claiming to be born in Mexico, he was never informed of his right to contact the Mexican Consulate, a right guaranteed to him by Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The Mexican government took legal action against the United States in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), arguing that the United States had violated the rights of both Mexico and Medellín, along with fifty-one other Mexican nationals in separate cases. The ICJ issued a ruling that found the United States guilty of violating the rights of these fifty-two Mexican nationals. Medellín sought a writ of habeas corpus, which was denied by lower courts. He then petitioned for a writ of certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted twice. While President George W. Bush supported the ICJ's decision, Solicitor General Ted Cruz argued against the president on behalf of the State of Texas. Despite widespread expectations that Texas would lose, the Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled in favor of Texas and against Medellín in June 2008. Just two months later, Medellín was executed.

In this book, Alan Mygatt-Tauber delves into the story of Medellín v. Texas, highlighting how the 2008 ruling grappled with the challenging issue of how a unified republic that upholds the dual sovereignty of its constituent parts navigates the complexities of fulfilling its international obligations. However, this narrative extends beyond the legal realm and encompasses the realm of international human rights. It sheds light on the peculiar position of the United States concerning the death penalty, particularly in contrast to other nations.

The ICJ's ruling in Medellín v. Texas underscored the importance of ensuring that individuals facing criminal charges are afforded their fundamental rights, regardless of their nationality or place of residence. The case highlighted the need for states to cooperate with international legal frameworks and obligations, particularly when dealing with cross-border crimes. It also raised concerns about the potential for human rights abuses and the need for robust mechanisms to protect the rights of individuals facing the death penalty.

Despite the ruling in favor of Texas, the case sparked widespread debate and criticism. Many believed that the decision was flawed and that Medellín's rights had been violated. Some critics argued that the United States had failed to uphold its commitment to protecting human rights and that the death penalty was inherently cruel and inhumane. Others argued that the ICJ's decision had undermined the authority of the United States Supreme Court and that the case should have been resolved within the American legal system.

The Medellín v. Texas case also highlighted the broader political and social implications of the death penalty. The case brought attention to the disproportionate representation of minorities and low-income individuals in the American criminal justice system, as well as the racial biases and inequalities that exist within the criminal justice system. Many believed that the death penalty was a tool of oppression and that it perpetuated cycles.

In conclusion, the story of Medellín v. Texas is a complex and multifaceted narrative that encompasses issues of international human rights, criminal justice, and the death penalty. The case highlights the need for states to cooperate with international legal frameworks and obligations, the importance of protecting the rights of individuals facing criminal charges, and the broader political and social implications of the death penalty. It serves as a reminder of the ongoing struggle to ensure that justice is administered fairly and that human rights are respected in all circumstances.

Dimension: 229 x 152 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9780700633616