<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?><feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' xmlns:georss='http://www.georss.org/georss' xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901</id><updated>2010-04-23T18:23:52.038-04:00</updated><title type='text'>JURIST - Gazette</title><subtitle type='html'></subtitle><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/index.php'/><link rel='hub' href='http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/'/><link rel='next' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default?start-index=26&amp;max-results=25'/><link rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/blogger_rss.xml'/><author><name>Bernard Hibbitts</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><generator version='7.00' uri='http://www.blogger.com'>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>2084</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-3730149132109649140</id><published>2010-04-09T12:42:00.005-04:00</published><updated>2010-04-23T18:22:20.419-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Stevens resignation letter [US SC]</title><summary type='text'>Resignation letter of Justice Stevens, Chambers of Justice John Paul Stevens, April 9, 2010 [announcing that he plans to step down at the end of the court's 2009 summer term].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/3730149132109649140/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=3730149132109649140' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/3730149132109649140'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/3730149132109649140'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/04/stevens-resignation-letter-us-sc.php' title='Stevens resignation letter [US SC]'/><author><name>Lauren Mullen</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/13632676780444776772</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='15861860481724990113'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-5327316697123532901</id><published>2010-04-08T13:42:00.005-04:00</published><updated>2010-04-23T18:23:52.047-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Pakistan presidential powers bill [Pakistan]</title><summary type='text'>18th Amendment Bill of the Pakistan Constitution, Pakistan National Assembly, April 8, 2010 [bill reversing recent expansion of presidential powers by transferring presidential powers to the office of the prime minister].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the Pakistan Constitution.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/5327316697123532901/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=5327316697123532901' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5327316697123532901'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5327316697123532901'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/04/pakistan-presidential-powers-bill.php' title='Pakistan presidential powers bill [Pakistan]'/><author><name>Lauren Mullen</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/13632676780444776772</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='15861860481724990113'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-7830636966168041693</id><published>2010-03-22T12:35:00.004-04:00</published><updated>2010-03-22T14:15:13.556-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Health care reform bill [US House]</title><summary type='text'>Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, US House of Representatives, March 21, 2010 [approving a Senate bill to extend health care coverage].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on federal health care reform.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/7830636966168041693/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=7830636966168041693' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/7830636966168041693'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/7830636966168041693'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/health-care-reform-bill-us-house.php' title='Health care reform bill [US House]'/><author><name>Lauren Mullen</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/13632676780444776772</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='15861860481724990113'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-8764414720715874350</id><published>2010-03-15T14:37:00.002-04:00</published><updated>2010-03-19T17:10:20.661-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Financial stability bill [US Senate Banking Comm.]</title><summary type='text'>A Bill to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail", to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes, US Senate Banking Committee, March 15, 2010 [aiming to increase financial regulation in the wake of</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/8764414720715874350/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=8764414720715874350' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/8764414720715874350'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/8764414720715874350'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/financial-stability-bill-us-senate.php' title='Financial stability bill [US Senate Banking Comm.]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-6578658684171328201</id><published>2010-03-12T17:41:00.004-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-19T17:08:01.109-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Autism vaccine link rulings [US Fed Ct Claims]</title><summary type='text'>Mead v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-215V, King v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-584V, Dwyer v. Secretary of Health and Human Services Case No. 03-1202V, US Federal Court of Claims, March 12, 2010 [rejecting three compensation actions brought in a coordinated omnibus proceeding by families of autistic children who had argued that their children's autism </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/6578658684171328201/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=6578658684171328201' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/6578658684171328201'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/6578658684171328201'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/autism-vaccine-link-rulings-us-fed-ct.php' title='Autism vaccine link rulings [US Fed Ct Claims]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-5337646566147707877</id><published>2010-03-11T17:30:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-19T17:05:49.055-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Pledge of Allegiance in schools ruling [9th Circuit]</title><summary type='text'>Newdow, et al. v. Roe, et al., US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, March 11, 2010 [holding that a teacher-led recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools does not violate the constitution].      Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the Pledge of Allegiance.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/5337646566147707877/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=5337646566147707877' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5337646566147707877'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5337646566147707877'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/pledge-of-allegiance-in-schools-ruling.php' title='Pledge of Allegiance in schools ruling [9th Circuit]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-887946335950612011</id><published>2010-03-10T17:00:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-19T16:59:57.259-04:00</updated><title type='text'>Federal health insurance mandate negation bill [VA GA]</title><summary type='text'>A bill to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 38.2-3430.1:1, relating to individual accident and sickness insurance coverage, Virginia General Assembly, March 10, 2010 [banning any federal mandate for individuals to have health insurance].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on federal health care reform.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/887946335950612011/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=887946335950612011' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/887946335950612011'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/887946335950612011'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/federal-health-insurance-mandate.php' title='Federal health insurance mandate negation bill [VA GA]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-9183959661892605484</id><published>2010-03-02T16:05:00.004-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T16:54:26.854-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Constructive termination recovery ruling [US SC]</title><summary type='text'>Mac's Shell Service, Inc., et al. v. Shell Oil Products Co. LLC, et al., US Supreme Court, March 2, 2010 [ruling unanimously in Mac's Shell Service, Inc. v. Shell Oil Products Co. that a service station operator cannot recover for constructive termination under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act].    Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/9183959661892605484/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=9183959661892605484' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/9183959661892605484'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/9183959661892605484'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/constructive-termination-recovery.php' title='Constructive termination recovery ruling [US SC]'/><author><name>Lauren Mullen</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/13632676780444776772</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='15861860481724990113'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-658415549935682963</id><published>2010-03-02T15:50:00.003-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T16:56:14.985-05:00</updated><title type='text'>DC same-sex marriage ruling [US SC]</title><summary type='text'>Jackson, et al v. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics, et al, US Supreme Court, March 2, 2010 [denying an emergency petition to prevent Washington DC's same-sex marriage law from taking effect].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on same-sex marriage.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/658415549935682963/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=658415549935682963' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/658415549935682963'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/658415549935682963'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/03/dc-same-sex-marriage-ruling-us-sc.php' title='DC same-sex marriage ruling [US SC]'/><author><name>Lauren Mullen</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/13632676780444776772</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='15861860481724990113'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-4727750510759276754</id><published>2010-02-26T20:29:00.005-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T16:59:41.242-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Binyam Mohamed judgment omitted text [UK CA]</title><summary type='text'>The Queen on the application of Binyam Mohamed v. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth, England and Wales Court of Appeal, February 26, 2010 [disclosing additional text that was omitted from a previous ruling related to former Guantanamo Bay detainee Binyam Mohamed].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on Binyam Mohamed.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/4727750510759276754/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=4727750510759276754' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/4727750510759276754'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/4727750510759276754'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/binyam-mohamed-judgment-omitted-text-uk.php' title='Binyam Mohamed judgment omitted text [UK CA]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-3536010198622277810</id><published>2010-02-25T21:23:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T17:01:02.424-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Setako genocide conviction [ICTR]</title><summary type='text'>The Prosecutor v. Ephrem Setako judgment summary, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, February 25, 2010 [convicting ex-army officer Ephrem Setako on charges of genocide, crimes against humanity, and murder and sentencing him to 25 years in prison.].      Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the International Criminal Tribunal for </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/3536010198622277810/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=3536010198622277810' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/3536010198622277810'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/3536010198622277810'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/setako-genocide-conviction-ictr.php' title='Setako genocide conviction [ICTR]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-4002309693667640389</id><published>2010-02-24T21:51:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T17:03:14.678-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Fifth Amendment  protection ruling [US SC]</title><summary type='text'>Maryland v. Shatzer, US Supreme Court, February 24, 2010 [holding that the Edwards v. Arizona prohibition against interrogation of a suspect who has invoked the Fifth Amendment right to counsel does not require suppression of statements if, after the suspect asks for counsel, there is a break of more than two years before resuming interrogation].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/4002309693667640389/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=4002309693667640389' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/4002309693667640389'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/4002309693667640389'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/fifth-amendment-protection-ruling-us-sc.php' title='Fifth Amendment  protection ruling [US SC]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-6739326414978677393</id><published>2010-02-24T20:51:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T17:05:51.115-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Maryland same-sex marriage reciprocity recommendation [MD AG]</title><summary type='text'>Marriage - Whether out-of-state same-sex marriage that is valid in the state of celebration may be recognized in Maryland, Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler, February 24, 2010 [opinion encouraging the state of Maryland and its agencies to recognize same-sex marriages performed lawfully in other states].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/6739326414978677393/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=6739326414978677393' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/6739326414978677393'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/6739326414978677393'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/maryland-same-sex-marriage-reciprocity.php' title='Maryland same-sex marriage reciprocity recommendation [MD AG]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-2411954798214981484</id><published>2010-02-23T21:37:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2010-03-10T17:10:37.499-05:00</updated><title type='text'>'Enhanced' interrogation techniques congressional briefings documents [CIA]</title><summary type='text'>Re: Judicial Watch v. CIA, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), declassified/released February 23, 2010 [indicating that the CIA briefed lawmakers between 2001 and 2007 on the specifics of "enhanced" interrogation techniques].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on "enhanced" interrogation techniques.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/2411954798214981484/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=2411954798214981484' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/2411954798214981484'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/2411954798214981484'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/enhanced-interrogation-techniques.php' title='&apos;Enhanced&apos; interrogation techniques congressional briefings documents [CIA]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-1834540900821391397</id><published>2010-02-19T16:39:00.003-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:05:38.744-05:00</updated><title type='text'>'Enhanced interrogation' memos report  [US DOJ]</title><summary type='text'> Investigation into the Office of Legal Counsel's Concerning Issues Relating to the Central Intelligence Agency's Use of "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" on Suspected Terrorists, US Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility, released publicly February 19, 2010 [concluding that two Bush administration lawyers committed professional misconduct when they wrote memos authorizing </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/1834540900821391397/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=1834540900821391397' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/1834540900821391397'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/1834540900821391397'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/enhanced-interrogation-memos-report-us.php' title='&apos;Enhanced interrogation&apos; memos report  [US DOJ]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-5962240159375096633</id><published>2010-02-17T00:15:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:17:53.743-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Israeli Hezbollah rocket victims complaint [US DC]</title><summary type='text'>Kaplan, et al. v. Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, et al., US District Court for the District of Columbia, February 17, 2010 [seeking damages from Iran and Iran's central bank for injuries suffered in the 2006 Second Lebanon War].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the Second Lebanon War.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/5962240159375096633/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=5962240159375096633' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5962240159375096633'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5962240159375096633'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/israeli-hezbollah-rocket-victims.php' title='Israeli Hezbollah rocket victims complaint [US DC]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-1783475554037651449</id><published>2010-02-16T00:46:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:20:14.067-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Guantanamo suicide wrongful death case ruling [US DC]</title><summary type='text'>Al-Zahrani, et al. v. Rumsfeld, et al., US District Court for the District of Columbia, February 16, 2010 [holding that claims of unlawful treatment and wrongful death brought on behalf of two former Guantanamo Bay detainees are barred by the Military Commissions Act of 2006].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on Guantanamo Bay.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/1783475554037651449/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=1783475554037651449' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/1783475554037651449'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/1783475554037651449'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/guantanamo-suicide-wrongful-death-case.php' title='Guantanamo suicide wrongful death case ruling [US DC]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-2980646980059646213</id><published>2010-02-16T00:31:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:31:23.578-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Convention on cluster munitions [UN]</title><summary type='text'>United Nations Convention on Cluster Munitions, United Nations, ratified by the 30th country February 16, 2010 and scheduled to enter into force August 1, 2010 [banning the use, development, and production of cluster munitions; prescribing particular disposal/destruction methods for cluster munitions already in existence; providing for victims' rights; outlining expectations of the international </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/2980646980059646213/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=2980646980059646213' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/2980646980059646213'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/2980646980059646213'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/convention-on-cluster-munitions-un.php' title='Convention on cluster munitions [UN]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-5859019138871659224</id><published>2010-02-14T20:22:00.006-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:32:42.182-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Disabled voters polling facilities ruling [Canadian Human Rights Tribunal]</title><summary type='text'>Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Elections Canada, Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, February 12, 2010 [ordering Elections Canada to ensure that polling facilities are accessible to voters with disabilities].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the Canadian Human Rights Act.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/5859019138871659224/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=5859019138871659224' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5859019138871659224'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/5859019138871659224'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/disabled-voters-polling-facilities.php' title='Disabled voters polling facilities ruling [Canadian Human Rights Tribunal]'/><author><name>Anna Kavalauskas</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='08390226142625317140'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-1649606670536472095</id><published>2010-02-05T14:12:00.005-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:35:46.035-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Kenya minority land rights ruling [ACHPR]</title><summary type='text'>Center for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International v. Kenya, African Commission on Human and People's Rights, February 4, 2010 [ruling that the government of Kenya violated the rights of indigenous Endorois people when it forcibly evicted them from their land].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/1649606670536472095/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=1649606670536472095' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/1649606670536472095'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/1649606670536472095'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/kenya-minority-land-rights-ruling-achpr.php' title='Kenya minority land rights ruling [ACHPR]'/><author><name>Anna Kavalauskas</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='08390226142625317140'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-8697595006162795509</id><published>2010-02-03T13:08:00.008-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:39:41.425-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Bashir genocide arrest warrant ruling [ICC]</title><summary type='text'>Prosecutor v. al-Bashir, International Criminal Court, Appeals Chamber, February 3, 2010 [reversing a Pre-Trial Chamber decision denying an application for an arrest warrant for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir on genocide charges].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on Omar al-Bashir.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/8697595006162795509/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=8697595006162795509' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/8697595006162795509'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/8697595006162795509'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/bashir-genocide-arrest-warrant-ruling.php' title='Bashir genocide arrest warrant ruling [ICC]'/><author><name>Anna Kavalauskas</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='08390226142625317140'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-282601025497485160</id><published>2010-02-02T08:49:00.003-05:00</published><updated>2010-02-20T19:41:26.913-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Oklahoma illegal immigration law ruling [10th Circuit]</title><summary type='text'>Chamber of Commerce of the United Stated of America, et al. v. WA Drew Edmonson, et al., US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, February 2, 2010 [upholding the majority of an injunction against an Oklahoma anti-illegal immigration law, but permitting the state to enact a provision requiring businesses to check their employment roster against a state list of eligible workers through a pilot </summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/282601025497485160/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=282601025497485160' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/282601025497485160'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/282601025497485160'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/02/oklahoma-illegal-immigration-law-ruling.php' title='Oklahoma illegal immigration law ruling [10th Circuit]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-3302597986353822367</id><published>2010-01-26T17:03:00.001-05:00</published><updated>2010-01-31T19:16:49.600-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Terror suspect assets freezing judgment [UK SC]</title><summary type='text'>Her Majesty's Treasury v. Ahmed, et al., Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, January 26, 2010 [holding that executive orders allowing the government to freeze the assets of suspected terrorists are illegal].Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on the freezing of assets.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/3302597986353822367/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=3302597986353822367' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/3302597986353822367'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/3302597986353822367'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/01/terror-suspect-assets-freezing-judgment.php' title='Terror suspect assets freezing judgment [UK SC]'/><author><name>Ingrid Burke</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/11677828657640506476</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='17424483407543493366'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-4375695734424791731</id><published>2010-01-21T12:47:00.009-05:00</published><updated>2010-01-31T19:18:56.693-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Political campaign spending ruling [US SC]</title><summary type='text'>Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, US Supreme Court, January 21, 2010 [easing restrictions on political campaign spending by corporations].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on corporate campaign spending.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/4375695734424791731/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=4375695734424791731' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/4375695734424791731'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/4375695734424791731'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/01/political-campaign-spending-ruling-us.php' title='Political campaign spending ruling [US SC]'/><author><name>Anna Kavalauskas</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='08390226142625317140'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7257901.post-2164562799161795741</id><published>2010-01-20T13:38:00.002-05:00</published><updated>2010-01-31T19:19:51.710-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Ineffective assistance of counsel ruling [US SC]</title><summary type='text'>Wood v. Allen, US Supreme Court, January 20, 2010 [ruling that failure to present defendant's impaired mental functioning did not constitute ineffective counsel, finding that the lower court had correctly applied the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act].     Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here. Latest commentary available here. JURIST has more on ineffective assistance of counsel.</summary><link rel='replies' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/2164562799161795741/comments/default' title='Post Comments'/><link rel='replies' type='text/html' href='https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7257901&amp;postID=2164562799161795741' title='0 Comments'/><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/2164562799161795741'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7257901/posts/default/2164562799161795741'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/gazette/2010/01/ineffective-assistance-of-counsel.php' title='Ineffective assistance of counsel ruling [US SC]'/><author><name>Anna Kavalauskas</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:extendedProperty xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' name='OpenSocialUserId' value='08390226142625317140'/></author><thr:total>0</thr:total></entry></feed>