Which obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations was the U.S. held to have violated with respect to Mexico?
Which obligations had the United States failed to keep with respect to the Mexican defendants?
How did the Court interpret the Consular Convention phrase "without delay"?
If, in the future, a Mexican national (or indeed a national of any state which is a party to the Vienna Contention on Consular Relations) is not informed by the U.S. (or any state party to the Convention) of his/her rights under the Convention and is detained by the government or convicted and sentenced to jail, what must the U.S. (or any other state party to the Convention) do to remedy the situation and what rights would the individual have?
Did Gracia "object to the application" of The Former Slavis Republic of Materia for membership in MATI?
Assuming, for purposes of this question, that Gracia did object to the application of The Former Slavis Republic of Materia for membership in MATI, does the second clause of the treaty between Gracia and The Former Slavis Republic of Materia permit such an objection in the circumstances outlined above?