October Term 2007 · Docket 06-984

Can a President's memo bind state courts to follow an international court order?

Medellin argues a presidential memo makes an ICJ order binding. Texas argues the memo lacks legal force.

Official caption
Jose Ernesto Medellin, v. Texas
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Donovan argued treaties require compliance with ICJ decisions.

    Cruz argued the memo is not binding federal law.

    Roberts asked who enforces treaty constraints domestically.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Medellin seeks a state court review of his sentence. Texas refuses to follow the international order.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 10, 2007.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Medellin wants Texas courts to review his sentence.

Texas wants to ignore the international court order.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Medellin claims treaties and a memo create binding federal law.

Texas claims the memo does not create binding federal law.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked if treaties can require unconstitutional state acts.

Justice Ginsburg asked if the ICJ ever orders specific sentences.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the power of presidential memos. It determines if international orders bind state courts.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON