Update: Adra Can Finally Rest…
In 1994, A 16 year San Antonio girl was brutally raped, tortured, strangled, then had her skull bashed in by a piece of asphalt by an illegal alien. To underscore the brutality of this attack, the San Antonio police reported that;
“Officers reported that she was nude and lying on her back and that a bloody and broken stick protruded from her vagina, prosecutors said. “An autopsy showed that she died from blows to the head from a 30 to 40 pound chunk of asphalt found lying partially on her arm with which she had to have been struck several times. She was also strangled and had bite marks on her body that prosecutors say matched Leal’s teeth.”
To make matters worse, her attacker, 20-year-old Humberto Leal Garcia Jr., was a Mexican Citizen here in the US illegally. Today, Leal sits on death row in Texas awaiting execution on July 7th for the rape and murder of this 16-year-old girl. It has taken 17 years, one year longer than Adra lived on this earth, to bring Leal to justice. Or will he?
Obama has asked the Supreme Court to set aside this execution because an illegal alien was not granted his INTERNATIONAL VIENNA CONVENTION RIGHTS to have his consulate notified when he was arrested 17 years ago. Whose side is Obama on?
Today, the only thing you read about the brutal rape and murder of Adra is the outcries of injustice SUFFERED by her brutal attacker, Leal. Why the outcry? The progressive left, led by Obama and the International Law progressive left movement, is claiming that Leal was denied his right to contact the Mexican Consulate after his arrest according to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 . The Vienna Convention was a “treaty” that specified many consular duties and responsibilities and required notifications to consulates by home countries. One such provision requires that if a country arrests a citizen of another country, that person’s consulate must be notified. The only problem is that this provision violates the Supremacy Clause of the US constitution. Article VI, Clause 2 states:
“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.”
This Article clearly defines the hierarchy of precedence in terms of “superior” position; First, is the Constitution itself; second are the laws enacted by Congress or by one or more of the States; and third, those laws made by treaties that are duly ratified by a 2/3 vote of the Senate. Therefore, if any provision of the US Constitution, or any law enacted by Congress or by one or more of the States, takes precedence over the 1963 Vienna Convention.
This principle was recently upheld in two different cases:
Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon: The Court held that states could admit evidence against defendants even if the evidence was obtained in violation of the Vienna Convention. Justice Roberts clearly stated that the American “Exclusionary Rule of Evidence” is a rule idiosyncratic to American jurisprudence, and therefore, could not have been in contemplation by other nation-states when they ratified the Vienna Convention.
Medellin v. Texas: President George W. Bush had “decreed” that States had to abide by the Vienna Convention requiring notification of an arrested national’s consulate upon arrest. He cited the recent “World Court” decision in 2004 that said that dozens of Mexican Citizens (not US), charged with capital crimes, were being denied their “rights” by the US when the arresting agency did not inform the national’s consulate that they had been arrested. At the core of the meddling of the World Court and the Bush Administration was the Medellin case itself. At center of this international dispute is Jose E. Medellin, a onetime gang member in Houston who took part in the rape and slaying of two teenaged girls, one 14 and the other 16, on June 24, 1993. The victims were abused for an hour, then killed to prevent them from identifying their tormentors. Mr. Medellin strangled one girl with her shoelaces.
Fortunately, the Supreme Court heard the case and reiterated their position in Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon whereby they held that US law superseded international law or international judgements.
The court went further in Medellin v. Texas when Justice Roberts wrote that the international court “is not domestic law,” thereby restricting the president’s power over states. The executive’s narrow and strictly limited authority to settle international claims disputes pursuant to an executive agreement cannot stretch so far as to support the current presidential memorandum”
Clearly the court drew a line in the sand and established the order of precedence when assessing the actions of law enforcement in the US regarding illegal aliens who are arrested in this country after committing crimes against our citizens. First, the Constitution; second, the laws of the United States or the laws of one or more of the several States; and third, provisions of Treaties duly ratified by the US Senate.
The Tenacity and Ruthlessness of the Left:
The left is relentless in their quest to overthrow our Constitution by replacing it or making it subservient to International Law. With the current 5-4 split on the court, we are edging close to the abyss in having a court that is more committed to international progressivism than to our Founding Principles. It is a shame that today, the headlines are slanted to appear that the State of Texas has violated the CONSTITUTIONAL rights of 50 or so illegal aliens on death row that have been convicted of murder. That is not the case at all. What the headlines point to in the body of their text is the violation OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAW RIGHTS of these convicted murderers. You won’t find any left-wing rags like the NY Times or the LA Times accurately reporting on the fate of Leal. You will read headlines like “The law, even on Texas’ death row“. LA times editorial, July 2, 2011; or “In Texas, no ordinary death row case“, Published 03/07/2011 21:29:00 CapitalBay Online; these misleading headlines make the reader think that Texas should be made to abide by the “law” even given the barbaric nature of the Texas death row. The writer tries to indict the Texas Penal System rather than the criminal and seeks to erroneously state as a matter of fact that Texas is in violation of the law by executing Leal. They fail to point out that the law is “International Law” whose jurisdiction and applicability do not pertain to Medellin nor Leal, period. The no ordinary death row case is an illusionary headline attempting to make the reader think that this case is different then in the body of the piece goes on to spell out the violation of international law and the US lawlessness in the International Community.
Forgetting Adra Sauceda and her horror
The left does not care about the final hours in the life of 16-year-old Adra Sauceda. She was attending a party with friends like many teenagers. She never thought when she left her home that night that she would never return. She never thought that night that she would never graduate with her high school class. She never thought that she would never marry and maybe have a family of her own. Her options were erased by an illegal alien who should not even have been in this country much less at the party attended by Adra and her friends that night. Adra could have been any of our daughters who have been in similar circumstances. It is time to remember our victims and their families, and not the Left’s agenda to take down this country by destroying our Constitution that is the only thing that stands between us, our children, and the hundreds of Leals and Medellins out there preying on our lives and the lives of our families.
May Adra rest in peace and her family be comforted by our prayers.