How arrogant!

Me, not someone else. The Supreme Court issued a ruling yesterday, and I think everyone is wrong. Of course, I have zero years of law school and an equally impressive amount of legal practice with which to back my opinions up.

The weirdest thing of all is that Duhbya's minions actually got one thing right. The 1963 Vienna Convention, which the U.S. government duly and Constitutionally signed, does bind our courts at all levels to consular access for arrested foreign citizens. That's what Article V, paragraph 2 means:

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, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Could this be any plainer? The 6-justice majority can read, can't they?

The Bushists, of course, don't seem to care for the supremacy of treaties at other times when it doesn't suit them. Vienna Convention, amen! Geneva? Never heard of it. So their motives are immediately suspect, and of course it appears that their overriding principle of more and more and more power for me, me, me is their guide.

Duhbya and his men think that the President has the power to order judicial compliance in a state. Uh, sorry, he has standing to raise the issue in court, but separation of powers should prevent him ordering it.

It's not clear from the news story how the three dissenters supported their ruling, but this Stephen Breyer quote is, uh, stupid:

The nation may well break its word even though the president seeks to live up to that word.

Treaty ratification, then, can just be a national lie? It's anyone's guess?

The right (i.e. my) ruling would have been:

• The Supreme Court orders rehearings or something equivalent on the basis of our Constitutional obligation to enforce the treaty.
• The President may not order such hearings; they are a judicial remedy that the President may bring to our attention under original jurisdiction in keeping with the second paragraph of Article III, section 2.
  

Problem is that now I'll have to go read the decision so that I can find out that I'm wrong, too! As a sop, though, arrogant old me could then criticize the reporter for inadequate reporting in a plain attempt to slough off blame onto someone else.