U.N. Criticizes Texas for Execution

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Simple case. Illegal alien murders an American in Texas, he went to trial, lost his case, and was sentenced to death. The execution took place as needed. End of story. . . not quite.

The United Nations dared to criticize Texas for the execution of Humberto Leal, a man who sickeningly killed Adria Sauceda in 1994 by bashing in her head with a nearly 40-pound piece of asphalt. He also raped her, strangled her, and then left her nude body on a dirt road with a piece of wood stuck in her.

The U.N. called the trial and execution of Leal a breach of International Law by the U.S.

The States are not bound by International Law, nor is the United States. The U.N. can kiss our American butts.

Hillary Clinton also criticized Texas for the trial and execution, whose spokeswoman stated "You know that the U.S. government sought a stay of Leal's execution in order to give the Congress time to act on the Consular Notification Compliance Act, which would have provided Leal the judicial review required by international law.

"Frankly if we don't protect the rights of non-Americans in the United States, we seriously risk reciprocal lack of access to our own citizens overseas. So this is why the secretary is concerned. ... We've got to treat non-Americans properly here if we expect to be able to help our citizens overseas."

So we are to toss out State sovereignty? We are to ignore the law? We are to ignore the heinous actions by this animal? And since when are Americans not treated like crap by other court systems?

Governor Rick Perry rejected the international organization's, and federal government's, criticism, saying plainly that "If you commit the most heinous of crimes in Texas, you can expect to face the ultimate penalty under our laws."

Leal raped and bludgeoned a 16-year-old girl to death, and a jury agreed. That should be the end of the whole argument.

People like Leal proved he could care less about American laws, a tendency that seems to be true of many illegal aliens. Leal, when after claiming responsibility for the slaying, shouted "Viva Mexico!"

The Founding Fathers were concerned with divided loyalties. This is a great example as to why.

Mexico's government asked the American federal government to stop the execution of Leal so Congress may consider legislation that would require court reviews for condemned foreign nationals who weren't offered the help of their consulates.

The high court rejected the request 5-4.

If the Supreme Court had ruled the other way, Texas could have told the court to take a flying leap. It is a State issue, State responsibility, and the federal courts, which lacks an enforcement arm anyhow, has no right to dictate to the States what to do in these cases.

One can only wonder if Perry had enough cajones to stand up to the courts as he should have if the Supremes had voted the other way.

Perry's spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said, "Texas is not bound by a foreign court's ruling."

Texas is not bound by a federal court's ruling, either, if the ruling is on an issue not within the Constitutional authority of the federal government.

Besides, continued Cesinger, "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the treaty was not binding on the states and that the president does not have the authority to order states to review cases of the then 51 foreign nationals on death row in the U.S."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

U.N. official decries Texas execution; Gov. Perry defends - Seattle Times