UPDATE: Guide to Research on Vienna Convention on Consular Relations Notification Requirements
By Barbara H. Bean
Updated by Cindy G. Buys
Cindy G. Buys is a Professor and Director of International Law Programs at Southern Illinois University School of Law. She holds an LLM from Georgetown University Law Center, a Juris Doctorate and a Master’s of Arts in International Relations from Syracuse University, and a Bachelor’s of Arts in Political Science from the State University of New York at Albany.
Barbara H. Bean is a Reference and Public Services Librarian at Michigan State University College of Law, East Lansing Michigan. She holds a law degree from Georgetown University Law Center and a Master’s of Science in Information Science from the University at Albany, New York. Portions of this guide were presented at the 2006 Annual Meeting of the American Association of Law Libraries.
Published October 2015
(Previously updated by Barbara H. Bean in June/July 2007)
Table of Contents
2.2. Internet Resources
4.1. United Nations
4.2. United States
8.1. United States
9. State Statutes That Address Consular Notification in Case of Arrest or Detention of a Foreign National
11.1. Selected Research Guides
11.2. American Law Reports
Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to which 177 nations are party, requires a nation arresting or detaining a foreign national to afford the detainee access to his or her consulate and to notify the foreign national of the right of consular access. In the number of U.S. cases involving foreign nationals, defendants have raised the issue of failure by the detaining authorities to make the necessary notifications. Many of these cases have involved death penalty and a number of cases have been heard by the Supreme Court. A series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions have underscored the difficulty of this issue: treaties are negotiated on behalf of the United States, while arrests and prosecutions are made on the local level. Although the principle of U.S. compliance with the treaty obligations is accepted, enforcement has been spotty, and there has been no meaningful penalty for non-compliance at the local level. Foreign governments have brought challenges to the United States in the International Court of Justice, which has ruled against the United States on three occasions during the period from 1998 through 2004. Following the latest ICJ ruling, the Bush Administration withdrew from the Optional Protocol to the Consular Convention submitting to the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. This guide describes sources required to research the issue of compliance with the Vienna Convention notification obligations; whether the need is of a practical or scholarly nature.
- Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (596 UNTS 261, TIAS 6820, 21 UST 77)
- Optional Protocol to the Convention on Consular Relations Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes (596 UNTS 487, TIAS 6820, 21 UST 325)
- The United States is also party to a number of bilateral treaties with individual countries that address the conduct of consular relations. Obligations under these treaties may supplement or replace obligations under the Vienna Convention. Information regarding these treaties (including citation information) may be found on the State Department website.
- Fletcher School, Tufts University. Multilaterals Project (Available at Wayback machine)
- U. S. Department of State (Treaty Excerpts)
- United Nations Treaty Collection
- LexisNexis - International Law – Treaties & International Agreements
- Westlaw - International Law – Multinational Materials – Treaties and Agreements
- TIARA - Treaties and Agreements Online
- HeinOnline - Treaties and Agreements Library
- Status of multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary General
- TIARA – Treaties and Agreements Online – “Document Details”
- United States Department of State Office of Treaty Affairs
4.1. United Nations
· International Law Commission – Summaries of the Work of the International Law Commission – Law of International Relations – Consular Intercourse and Immunities
· United Nations Conference on Consular Relations, Official Records (UN doc number: A/Conf.25/16-A/Conf.25/16/Add.1)
Volume I: Summary Records of Plenary Meetings and of the Meetings of the First and Second Committees
Volume II: Annexes; Vienna Convention on Consular Relations; Final Act; Optional Protocols; Resolutions
- Library of Congress: THOMAS – Treaties
- Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, S. Exec. Rep. No. 91-9, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969) (Committee Hearing).
- 5 Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents No 19 (1969).
- Treaties and other International Agreements: the Role of the United States Senate: a Study Prepared for the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate by the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress. Buffalo, N.Y.: W.S. Hein, 2004.
· The U.S. State Dept. publishes many useful materials on consular notification, including a manual and training material for law enforcement on consular notification.
o Consular Notification and Access (offers access to pocket cards, training manual, training resources, fax sheets, etc.)
· President Bush’s Memorandum for Attorney General on February 28, 2005.
· United Nations Treaty Collection: Status of multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary General
8.1. United States
- U.S. Supreme Court – opinions, oral arguments, briefs
- Medellín v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008)
- Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon & Bustillo v. Johnson (Virginia and Oregon) 126 S.Ct. 2669, 165 L.Ed.2d 557 (2006)
- Breard v. Greene, 523 U.S. 371 (1998) (ICJ: Paraguay v. United States)
- Federal Republic of Germany v. United States, 526 U.S. 111 (1999) (ICJ: LaGrand)
- Federal Courts – Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts – Pacer - electronic access to U.S. District, Bankruptcy, and Appellate court records.(subscription database
Selected U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals Cases:
- United States v. De La Pava, 268 F.3d 157 (2d Cir. 2001)
- Mora v. New York, 524 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2008)
- Faulder v. Johnson, 81 F.3d 518 (5th Cir. 1996)
- United States v. Jimenez-Nava, 243 F.3d 192 (5th Cir. 2001)
- United States v. Emuegbunam, 268 F.3d 377 (6th Cir. 2001)
- Jogi v. Voges, 480 F.3d 822 (7th Cir. 2007) (Jogi II); Jogi v. Voges, 425 F.3d 367 (7th Cir. 2005) (Jogi I)
- Osageide v. United States, 543 F.3d 399 (7th Cir. 2008)
- Sobitan v. Glud, 589 F.3d 379 (7th Cir. 2009)
- Sandoval v. United States, 574 F.3d 847 (7th Cir. 2009)
- United States v. Santos, 235 F.3d 1105 (8th Cir. 2000)
- United States v. Rangel-Gonzalez, 617 F.2d 529 (9th Cir. 1980)
- United States v. Villa-Fabela, 882 F.2d 434 (9th Cir. 1989)
- Cornejo v. County of San Diego, 504 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2007)
- Gandara v. Bennett, 528 F.3d 823 (11th Cir. 2008)
· State court website – online resources vary by state, e.g. Texas
· Also on subscription databases such as Westlaw and Lexis
· International Court of Justice (Decisions And Documents)
· Case Concerning Avena and 51 Other Mexican Nationals (Mex. v. U.S.),2004 I.C.J. 12 (Mar. 31)
· LaGrand Case (F.R.G. v. U.S.), 2001 I.C.J. 466 (Jun. 27)
· Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Para. v. U.S.), 1998 I.C.J. 248 (Apr. 9)
9. State Statutes That Address Consular Notification in Case of Arrest or Detention of a Foreign National
Some states have by statute made Vienna Convention notification mandatory when a foreign national is arrested or addressed other aspects of consular notification:
- California, Cal. Penal Code § 834c
- Florida, F.S. § 901.26
- Illinois, Public Act 099-0190 (effective date 1/1/2016)
- Nevada, N.R.S. 228.135N
- North Carolina, N.C.G.S. § 122C.344
- Oregon, O.R.S. § 181.642 and O.R.S. § 426.228
· 28 C.F.R.§ 50.5 – Notification of Consular Officers Upon the Arrest of Foreign Nationals
· 8 C.F.R. § 236.1(e) – Apprehension, Custody, and Detention.
· Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 5. Initial Appearance
11.1. Selected Research Guides
· United Nations Treaty Collection: Treaty Reference Guide
· United Nations Glossary of Treaty Terms
· Treaty research guides may also be located on law school library websites.
· Mark Warren, Foreign Nationals, Consular Rights & the Death Penalty
· Ann K. Wooster, Annotation, Construction and Application of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR), Requiring that Foreign Consulate be Notified when one of its Nationals is Arrested, 175 A.L.R. Fed. 243 (2002)
· World Court Consular Notification and Death Penalty Challenge Revisited: Mexico v. United States, vol. 8, issue 1 (2003) – by Pieter H.F. Bekker
· Consular Notification and the Death Penalty: The World Court’s Provisional Measures in Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States), vol. 8, issue 10 (2003) – by Pieter H.F. Bekker
· Consular Notification and the Death Penalty: The ICJ’s Judgment in Avena, vol. 8, issue 6 (2004) – by William Aceves
· President Bush's Determination Regarding Mexican Nationals and Consular Convention Rights, vol. 9, issue 9 (2005) – by Frederic L. Kirgis
· The Supreme Court Backs Away from a Consular Convention Case, vol. 9, issue 17 (2005) – by Frederic L. Kirgis
· The Supreme Court Decides a Consular Convention Case, vol. 10, issue 16 (2006) – by Frederic L. Kirgis
· Frederic L. Kirgis, The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Decides Medellin’s Consular Convention Case, 10 ASIL Insights (Nov. 8, 2006).
· The Seventh Circuit Again Finds Jurisdiction for Private Remedies for Violations of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, vol. 11, issue 14 (2007) – by Chimène I. Keitner and Kenneth C. Randall
· Medellin v. Texas: Supreme Court Holds ICJ Decisions under the Consular Convention Not Binding Federal Law, Rejects Presidential Enforcement of ICJ Judgments over State Proceedings, vol. 12, issue 6 (2008) – by Margaret E. McGuinness
- John Quigley, William A. Aceves, S. Adele Shank, The Law of Consular Access: A Documentary Guide (Routledge 2010)
- John Quigley and Luke Lee, Consular Law and Practice (OUP Oxford 2008)
· Michael John Garcia, Congressional Information Service, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: Overview of U.S. Implementation and International Court of Justice (ICJ) Interpretation of Consular Notification Requirements (2004).
· Luke T. Lee, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, with Texts and Commentaries on Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, United States-Soviet Consular Convention, 1964 [and] Draft European Convention on Consular Functions (1966).
· Equal Protection: Consular Assistance and Criminal Justice Procedures in the USA: An Introductory Guide for Consulates (Anne James & Joanne Cecil comps., 3d ed.)
· William J. Aceves, International Decisions: Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States) Provisional Measures Order, 97 Am. J. Int'l L. 923 (2003).
· William J. Aceves, International Decisions: LaGrand (Germany v. United States), 96 Am. J. Int'l L. 210 (2002).
· William J. Aceves, International Decisions: Case Concerning the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Federal Republic of Germany v. United States), 93 Am. J. Int'l L. 924 (1999).
· William J. Aceves, International Decisions: Application of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States), 92 Am. J. Int'l L. 517 (1998).
· William J. Aceves, The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: A Study of Rights, Wrongs, and Remedies, 31 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 257 (1998).
· Louis Antonacci, Lessons from LaGrand: An Argument for the Domestic Enforceability of Treaty-Based Rights Under International Prisoner Transfer Treaties, 3 Santa Clara J. Int’l L. 22 (2005).
· Agora: Breard, 92 Am. J. Int'l L. 675 (1998).
· Roger P. Alford, Federal Courts, International Tribunals, and the Continuum of Deference, 43 Va. J. Int'l L. 675 (2003).
· Sandra Babcock, The Limits Of International Law: Efforts To Enforce Rulings Of The International Court Of Justice In U.S. Death Penalty Cases, 62 Syracuse L. Rev. 183 (2012).
· Paul Schiff Berman, Federalism and International Law Through the Lens of Legal Pluralism, 73 Mo. L. Rev. 1151 (2008).
· Andrea Bianchi, International Law and U.S. Courts: The Myth of Lohengrin Revisited, 15 Eur. J. Int'l L. 751 (2004).
· Anthony N. Bishop, The Unenforceable Rights to Consular Notification and Access in the United States: What's Changed Since the LaGrand Case?, 25 Hous. J. Int'l L. 1 (2002).
· Curtis A. Bradley, Breard, Our Dualist Constitution, and the Internationalist Conception, 51 Stan. L. Rev. 529 (1999).
· Ronald A. Brand, Treaties and the Separation of Powers in the United States: A Reassessment after Medellín V. Texas, 47 Duq. L. Rev. 707 (2009).
· Emily S. Bremer, The Dynamic Last-In-Time Rule, 22 Ind. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev 27 (2012).
· Joshua A. Brook, Federalism and Foreign Affairs: How to Remedy Violations of the Vienna Convention and Obey the U.S. Constitution, Too, 37 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 573 (2004).
· Cindy Galway Buys, Reflections on the 50th Anniversary of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 38 S. Ill. U. L.J. 57 (2013).
· Cindy Galway Buys, Scott D. Pollock & Ioana Navarette Pellicer, Do Unto Others: The Importance of Better Compliance with Consular Notification Rights, 21 Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 461 (2011).
· Cindy Galway Buys, The United States Supreme Court Misses the Mark: Towards Better Implementation of the United States International Obligations, 24 Conn. J. Int’l L. 39 (2008).
· Linda E. Carter, Lessons from Avena: The Inadequacy of Clemency and Judicial Proceedings for Violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 15 Duke J. Comp. & Int'l L. 259 (2005).
· Linda E. Carter, Compliance with ICJ Provisional Measures and the Meaning of Review and Reconsideration Under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex v. U.S.), 25 Mich. J. Int’l L. 117 (2003).
· Linda E. Carter and John Cary Sims, The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the Rights of Non-Citizen Criminal Defendants: The Lessons of Breard, 9 California Defender 47 (1999).
· Christina M. Cerna, The Right to Consular Notification as A Human Right, 31 Suffolk Transnat'l L. Rev. 419 (2008).
· Sanja Djajic, The Effect of International Court of Justice Decisions on Municipal Courts in the United States: Breard v. Greene, 23 Hastings Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 27 (1999).
· Valerie Epps, Violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: Time for Remedies, 11 Willamette J. Int'l L. & Disp. Resol. 1 (2004).
· Joan Fitzpatrick, The Unreality of International Law in the United States and the LaGrand Case, 27 Yale J. Int'l L. 427 (2002).
· Klaus Ferdinand Gärditz, Case Nos. 2 BvR 2115/01, 2 BvR 2132/01 & 2 BvR 348/03 [Vienna Convention on Consular Relations case], 101 Am. J. Int’l L. 627 (2007).
· Sandy Ghandhi, Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America), Judgment of 31 March 2004, 54 ICLQ 779 (2005).
· Alex Glashausser, Difference and Deference in Treaty Interpretation, 50 Vill. L. Rev. 25 (2005).
· Malvina Halberstam, Lagrand and Avena Establish a Right, but Is There a Remedy? Brief Comments on the Legal Effect of Lagrand and Avena in the U.S., 11 ILSA J. Int'l & Comp. L. 415 (2005).
· Malvina Halberstam, The Constitutional Authority of the Federal Government in State Criminal Proceedings That involve U.S. Treaty Obligations or Affect U.S. Foreign Relations, 10 Ind. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 1 (1999).
· Oona A. Hathaway, Sabria McElroy & Sara Aronchick Solow, International Law at Home: Enforcing Treaties in U.S. Courts, 37 Yale J. Int’l L. 51 (2012).
· Carsten Hoppe, Implementation of LaGrand and Avena in Germany and the United States: Exploring a Transatlantic Divide in Search of a Uniform Interpretation of Consular Rights, 18 Eur. J. Int’l L. 317 (2007).
· Roberto Iraola, Federal Criminal Prosecutions and the Right to Consular Notification under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention, 105 W. Va. L. Rev. 179, 184 (2002).
· Mark J. Kadish, Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: The International Court of Justice in Mexico v. United States (Avena), 36 Geo. J. Int'l L. 1 (2004).
· Mark J. Kadish, Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: A Search for the Right to Consul, 18 Mich. J. Int'l L. 565 (1997).
· Mark J. Kadish & Charles C. Olson, Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon and Article 36 of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: The Supreme Court, the Right to Consul, and Remediation, 27 Mich. J. Int’l L. 1185 (2006).
· Sital Kalantry, The Intent-To-Benefit: Individually Enforceable Rights under International Treaties, 44 Stan. J. Int’l L. 63 (2008).
· Julian G. Ku, Structural Conflicts in the Interpretation of Customary International Law, 45 Santa Clara L. Rev. 857 (2005).
· Julian G. Ku, The State of New York Does Exist: How the States Control Compliance with International Law, 82 N.C. L. Rev. 457 (2004).
· Gregory J. Kuykendall, Alicia Amezcua-Rodriguez & Mark Warren, Mitigation Abroad: Preparing A Successful Case for Life for the Foreign National Client, 36 Hofstra L. Rev 989 (2008).
· Thomas H. Lee, Making Sense of the Eleventh Amendment: International Law and State Sovereignty, 96 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1027 (2002).
· Janet Koven Levit, Does Medellín Matter?, 77 Fordham L. Rev. 617 (2008).
· Janet Koven Levit, Sanchez-Llamas V. Oregon: The Glass Is Half Full, 11 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 29 (2007).
· Janet Koven Levit, Medellín V. Dretke: Another Chapter In the Vienna Convention Narrative, 41 Tulsa L. Rev. 193 (2005).Janet Koven Levit, A Tale of International Law in the Heartland: Torres and the Role of State Courts in Transnational Legal Conversation, 12 Tul. J. Comp. & Int’l L. 163 (2004-2005).
· Erik J. Luna & Douglas J. Sylvester, Beyond Breard, 17 Berkeley J. Int'l L. 147, (1999).
· Scott W. Lyons, Breach Without Remedy In The International Forum And The Need For Self-Help: The Conundrum Resulting From The Medellín Case, 13 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 73 (2009).
· Linda A. Malone, From Breard to Atkins to Malvo: Legal Incompetency and Human Rights Norms on the Fringes of the Death Penalty, 13 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 363 (2004).
· Asa Markel, The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: After the Federal Courts’ Abdication, Will State Courts Fill in the Breach?, 7 Chi.-Kent J. Int’l Comp. L. 1 (2007).
· Jenny S. Martinez, Enforcing the Decisions of International Tribunals in the U.S. Legal System, 45 Santa Clara L. Rev. 877 (2005).
· Margaret E. McGuinness, Sanchez-Llamas, American Human Rights Exceptionalism and The VCCR Norm Portal, 11 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 47 (2007).
· Martin Mennecke & Christian J. Tams, LaGrand Case (Germany v. United States of America), 51 ICLQ 449 (2002).John F. Murphy, Medellín V. Texas: Implications of the Supreme Court's Decision For the United States and The Rule Of Law In International Affairs, 31 Suffolk Transnat'l L. Rev. 247 (2008).
· Sean D. Murphy, Implementation of Avena Decision by Oklahoma Court, 98 Am. J. Int'l L. 581 (2004).
· Sean D. Murphy, U.S. Position before International Court of Justice in Mexican Death Penalty Case, 97 Am. J. Int'l L. 434 (2003).
· M. Todd Parker, “Review and Reconsideration:” In Search of a Just Standard of Review for Violations of Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 12 U.C. Davis J. Int’l L. & Pol’y 225 (2006).John T. Parry, Sanchez-Llamas In Context, 11 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 1 (2007).
· Jordan J. Paust, Breard and Treaty-Based Rights under the Consular Convention, 92 Am. J. Int'l L. 691 (1998).
· John B. Quigley, Vienna Convention On Consular Relations: In Retrospect And Into The Future, 38 S. Ill. U. L.J. 1 (2013).
· John Quigley, The United States’ Withdrawal from International Court of Justice Jurisdiction in Consular Cases: Reasons and Consequences, 19 Duke J. Comp. & Int’l L. 263 (2009).
· John Quigley, “If You Are not a United States Citizen . . .”: International Requirements in the Arrest of Foreigners, 6 Ohio St. J. Crim L. 661 (2009).
· John Quigley, Must Treaty Violations Be Remedied?: A Critique of Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 36 Ga. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 355 (2008).
· John Quigley, Toward More Effective Judicial Implementation of Treaty-Based Rights, 29 Fordham Int’l L. J. 552 (2006). John Quigley, Application of Consular Rights to Foreign Nationals: Standard for Reversal of a Criminal Conviction, 11 ILSA J. Int'l & Comp. L. 403 (2005).
· John Quigley, Suppressing the Incriminating Statements of Foreigners, 13 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 339 (2004).
· John Quigley, The Law of State Responsibility and the Right to Consular Access, 11 Willamette J. Int'l L. & Disp. Resol. 39 (2004).
· John Quigley, International Attention to the Death Penalty: Texas as a Lightning Rod, 8 Tex. J. on C.L. & C.R. 175 (2003).
· John Quigley, LaGrand: A Challenge to the U.S. Judiciary, 27 Yale J. Int'l L. 435 (2002).
· Henry J. Richardson III, The Execution of Angel Breard by the United States: Violating an Order of the International Court of Justice, 12 Temp. Int'l & Comp. L.J. 121 (1998).
· Laurence E. Rothenberg, International Law, U.S. Sovereignty, and the Death Penalty, 35 Geo. J. Int'l L. 547 (2004).
· William A. Schabas, The ICJ Ruling against the United States: Is It Really about the Death Penalty? 27 Yale J. Int'l L. 445 (2002).
· Howard S. Schiffman, The LaGrand Decision: The Evolving Legal Landscape of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in the U.S. Death Penalty Cases, 42 Santa Clara L. Rev. 1099 (2002).
· Howard S. Schiffman, Breard and Beyond: The Status of Consular Notification and Access under the Vienna Convention, 8 Cardozo J. Int'l & Comp. L. 27 (2000).
· S. Adele Shank & John Quigley, Foreigners on Texas's Death Row and the Right of Access to a Consul, 26 St. Mary's L.J. 719 (1995).
· Dinah Shelton, Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex v. U.S.), 98 Am. J. Int’l L. 559 (2004).
· Peter Shepherd, Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: An Oregon Law Enforcement Perspective, 11 Willamette J. Int’l L. & Disp. Res. 53 (2004).
· Bruno Simma and Carsten Hoppe, From LaGrand and Avena to Medellin – A Rocky Road toward Implementation, 14 Tul. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 7 (2005).
· John Cary Sims & Linda E. Carter, Emerging Importance of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations as a Defense Tool, 22-Sept/Oct Champion 28 (Sept/Oct 1998).
· Robert G. Spector, The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations: The Most Neglected Provision of International Family Law, 22 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 643 (2013).
· David P. Stewart, Weston Tribute – The Consular Notification Conundrum, 21 Transnat’l L. & Contemp. Probs. 685 (2013).
· Steven G. Stransky, Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon: A Missed Opportunity in Treaty Interpretation, 20 St. Thomas L. Rev. 25 (2007).
· Christian J. Tams, Recognizing Guarantees and Assurances of Non-repetition: LaGrand and the Law of State Responsibility, 27 Yale J. Int’l L. 441 (2002).
· William E. Thro, American Exceptionalism: Some Thoughts on Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 11 Tex. Rev. L. & Pol. 219 (2007).
· Victor M. Uribe, Consuls at Work: Universal Instruments of Human Rights and Consular Protection in the Context of Criminal Justice, 19 Hous. J. Int'l L. 375 (1997).Reynaldo Anaya Valencia, Craig L. Jackson, Leticia Van de Putte & Rodney Ellis, Avena and the World Court's Death Penalty Jurisdiction in Texas: Addressing the Odd Notion of Texas's Independence from the World, 23 Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 455 (2005).
· Kweku Vanderpuve & Robert W. Bigelow, The Vienna Convention and the Defense of Noncitizens in New York: A Matter of Form and Substance, 18 Pace Int’l L. Rev. 99 (2006).
· Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Breard, Printz, and the Treaty Power, 70 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1317 (1999).
· Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Night and Day: Coeur d'Alene, Breard, and the Unraveling of the Prospective-Retrospective Distinction in Eleventh Amendment Doctrine, 87 Geo. L.J. 1 (1998).
· Carlos Manuel Vázquez, Breard and the Federal Power to Require Compliance with ICJ Orders of Provisional Measures, 92 Am. J. Int'l L. 683 (1998).
· Carlos Manuel Vazquez, Treaty-Based Rights and Remedies of Individuals, 92 Colum. L. Rev. 1082 (1992).
· Mark Warren, Rendered Meaningless? Security Detentions and The Erosion of Consular Access Rights, 38 S. Ill. U. L.J. 27 (2013).
· Melissa A. Waters, Treaty Dialogue In Sanchez-Llamas: Is Chief Justice Roberts A Transnationalist, After All?, 11 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. 89 (2007).
· Mark Weisburd, International Courts and American Courts, 21 Mich. J. Int'l L. 877 (2000).
· Mark Weisburd, International Judicial Decisions, Domestic Courts, and the Foreign Affairs Power, 2005 Cato Sup. Ct. Rev. 287 (2004-2005).
· Richard J. Wilson, International Law Issues in Death Penalty Defense, 31 Hofstra L. Rev. 1195 (2003).
· Anthony S. Winer, An Escape Route from the Medellín Maze, 25 Conn. J. Int’l L. 331 (2010).
· Mark E. Wojcik, Consular Notification for Dual Nationals, 38 S. Ill. U. L.J. 73 (2013).
· Rebecca E. Woodman, International Miranda? Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 70 J. Kan. B. Ass'n 41 (2001).
To locate cases, laws and secondary sources involving the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in non-U.S. jurisdictions, use databases of foreign cases and legislation, using the title of the treaty in the language of the country searched, e.g. Convention de Vienne sur les Relations Consulaires, Convencion de Viena sobre Relaciones Consulares. (Foreign titles can be found by looking in the United Nations Treaty Series).
A collection of foreign statutes, constitutional requirements, and court decisions implementing Article 36 rights and remedies may be found here.