-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 10:53pm MSD
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] heard its final oral arguments [day call, PDF] of the term Wednesday in Arizona v. United States [transcript, PDF; JURIST report] to determine whether Arizona's controversial immigration law [SB 1070 materials; JURIST news archive] is preempted by federal law. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction last April before the law ever took effect, and Arizona asked the high court to weigh in [JURIST reports]. Four specific provisions of the law are at issue: Section 2(B), which requires police officers to check the immigration status of anyone whom...
-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 10:02pm MSD
[JURIST] The Louisiana State Senate on Tuesday approved a bill [text] to change the requirements regarding ultrasounds before a woman can undergo an abortion, including a new requirement to listen to the fetus' heartbeat. Current state law already already requires an ultrasound two hours before the procedure, but the new legislation would require the ultrasound to be performed 24 hours in advance. The new amendments will now be voted on in the House and if passed would add the requirement that doctors, during the ultrasound, "make audible the fetal heartbeat, if present, in a quality consistent with current medical practice."...
-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 9:43pm MSD
[JURIST] Army Col. Denise Lind refused Wednesday to dismiss Espionage Act [text] charges against Pfc. Bradley Manning [advocacy website; JURIST news archive] for allegedly transferring vast amounts of classified information to Wikileaks [website; JURIST news archive]. The ruling [AP report] will allow the discovery hearing to continue with the official trial scheduled to begin in September. Manning's defense argues that many others had access to his workplace computers in Iraq, he never should have been deployed to Iraq or entrusted with confidential information because he is emotionally troubled since he was barred from openly serving as a gay man, and...
-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 8:19pm MSD
[JURIST] The Maryland Court of Appeals [official website] on Tuesday struck down [opinion, PDF] a law [text, PDF] allowing police to collect DNA from individuals arrested for violent crimes and burglaries, finding it an unconstitutional violation of the Fourth Amendment [Cornell LII backgrounder]. The question was whether the government interest in collecting and testing a DNA sample without a warrant outweighs the intrusion on an arrestee's privacy. The 5-2 majority opinion stated:The State's purported interests are made less reasonable by the fact that DNA collection can wait until a person has been convicted, thus avoiding all the threats to privacy...
-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 7:52pm MSD
[JURIST] Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] on Monday challenged European governments to do more to address discrimination against Muslims [report, PDF], especially in the areas of employment and education. The report states that many women are denied jobs or access to classrooms simply because they are wearing traditional forms of dress, such as a headscarf [JURIST news archive]. Men also reportedly face discrimination for growing beards in a style traditionally associated with Islam. The report documents cases in European countries, such as Belgium, France, Netherlands, Spain and Switzerland, that have restrictions on building places of worship and have banned full...
-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 7:21pm MSD
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] ruled 5-4 [opinion, PDF] Wednesday in United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] that § 6501(e)(1)(A) [text] of the IRS code does not apply to an overstatement of basis. Ordinarily, the government must assess a deficiency against a taxpayer within "3 years after the return was filed." The three-year period is extended to six years, however, when a taxpayer "omits from gross income an amount properly includible therein which is in excess of 25 percent of the amount of gross income stated in the return." The question before the court...
-
Posted: April 25th, 2012, 12:31am MSD
[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF] Tuesday in Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak [transcript, PDF; JURIST report] on US sovereign immunity in suits involving "trust or restricted Indian lands." David Patchak filed suit to prevent the Secretary of the Interior from holding land in trust for a Michigan Indian tribe. The district court dismissed his suit for lack of standing. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled [opinion, PDF] that he had standing but found that the US was immune from suit. The case was heard...