Medellin v. Texas

This case is in the Supreme Court of the U.S. today.
Why? Well mostly because we have a pansy of a prez when it comes to protecting the borders...but I digress.
My take on this whole think is a bit more far-reaching than this one case.

Basically, the stance is that Medellin was not told he could speak and seek help from the Mexican consulate or some such. Not that he was denied, mind you. Just not told it was an obscure right he had (so obscure his own lawyer didn't know). Anyone reading this aware that illegal aliens committing heinous crimes could do that? I didn’t think so.
He was read his Miranda rights, had a lawyer, the whole schpiel.

The whole thing stems from a treaty that nations have amongst each other. Like a courtesy among them, and to provide protection and – IMHO, protect their own sovereignty.
And that’s the rub, the fly in the ointment for me.

Anyone that knows me knows I would be first in line to flip the switch, hang the rope, drop the pill, or insert the needle – whatever.

However……

If the SCOTUS rules that the compacts that the US entered with other sovereign nations supersede the state rights on how to prosecute foreign criminals, its not all bad.

Once that is established, why cant the US go to all these hokey “sanctuary” cities and say:
“Yo, quit trying to make your own rules and ignoring the sovereignty of the country that gave you the right to even BE a state. This safe haven crap is basically saying ‘This state supersedes YOUR sovereignty’.”
Well, maybe no those exact words….but you get the idea.
You then send Medellin back to his country, where boys and girls can fear him.
He is, of course, released with the implicit point that the US would not be responsible for a stray bullet if he was ever “caught” in the US again.

Go ahead, tell me how off base I am.


Reality:
Ok, I'm not the only one that finishes this douchebags name with "drug cartel", am I?