[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 8]
[House]
[Page 10809]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1215
                      U.S. COURTS VS. WORLD COURT

  (Mr. POE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. POE. Madam Speaker, teenagers Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena 
were viciously raped, beaten, strangled and stomped to death by six 
gang members in Houston in 1993. One of these killers, Mexican national 
Jose Ernesto Medellin, was given the death penalty. But the World Court 
claims that Medellin was denied access to the Mexican consulate during 
his arrest. The U.S. administration sided with the World Court in 
Mexico and ordered Texas to hold a new hearing for Medellin based on a 
treaty the United States signed in 1969. But the Texas court, highest 
Texas court, ruled 9-0 the administration had no constitutional 
authority to order Texas courts to do anything; upheld the conviction, 
ordered the execution, especially because Medellin never objected at 
trial that he did not see his consulate. The killer, with the support 
of the administration and Mexico, has appealed the Texas court decision 
to the United States Supreme Court. One wonders why the administration 
is siding with Mexico over the American court system.
  Madam Speaker, the ironic thing is the United States has withdrawn 
the consulate treaty provision. The United States justice system and 
the sovereignty of the United States Constitution should be paramount 
to the wishes of Mexico, the World Court and the administration. The 
Supreme Court should uphold this valid conviction and not give in to 
the wishes of Foreign Courts.
  And that's just the way it is.

                          ____________________