[JURIST] A ban on assault weapons [ordinance text] in the city of Denver was affirmed by operation of law [per curiam opinion] on Monday when the Colorado Supreme Court [official website] deadlocked in a 3-3 vote with one judge abstaining on whether to overturn the decisions in two lower court cases that had upheld the ban. The state enacted two laws [LCAV backgrounder] in 2003 that imposed regulations that superseded local ordinances governing firearms.

The city of Denver and some citizens sued the state in 2004, and a Denver judge ruled [PDF] that the city could ban the sale of assault weapons and Saturday night specials as it had in 1989 [AP report] and 1975 respectively, but had to comply with the other state regulations. AP has more. The Denver Post has local coverage.

[JURIST] A lawyer for terror suspect Jose Padilla [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] has filed a motion to suppress evidence [PDF text; exhibits] he claims the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) [official website] obtained illegally from two sources, one which alleges torture after US rendition to Morocco and another who may have been heavily medicated during interrogation. According to the motion filed last week, Padilla requests that the court toss several pieces of evidence, including a cellular phone allegedly given to Padilla by an al Qaeda member, an address book with the names of al Qaeda members, and $10,000 in cash, because the allegations of torture and possible impairment of the sources taints the statements on which the FBI based its warrant. Padilla attorney Andrew Patel [New York profile] faulted the US for failing to describe the allegations of torture while it procured the warrant and arrested Padilla.

In late April, the federal judge presiding over Padilla's case rejected a bid [JURIST report] by the US Department of Justice [official website] to require all lawyers involved in the trial to never reveal anything classified, and destroy copies of all classified evidence provided so that prosecutors may use evidence gained from secret FBI investigations, materials provided to the US government by foreign governments, and the results of military interrogations of Padilla during his three and a half year military custody as an "enemy combatant." AP has more.

[JURIST] Allegations that members of the US military killed civilians in Iraq [JURIST news archive] should be investigated by the United Nations [official website] and an Iraqi-US committee, Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi [CFR profile] said Monday. Al-Hashimi, a Sunni, described the allegations, along with the Abu Ghraib prison scandal [JURIST news archive], as part of a pattern of human rights violations by occupation forces.

Several investigations of Iraqi civilian deaths are already under way. An aide to Prime Minister Nouri Maliki [BBC profile] has said Iraq will probe the deaths of 11 civilians at Ishaqi [JURIST report] following the US military's announcement that US troops had been cleared of wrongdoing. Meanwhile, the US Defense Department [official website] continues to investigate allegations that US Marines killed 24 civilians last year at Haditha [JURIST news archive]. A preliminary inquiry reportedly suggests the killings were not provoked [JURIST report], and the Iraqi Cabinet is planning to investigate [JURIST report] the Haditha deaths as well. In a separate incident in Hamandiya, a defense lawyer has said that military prosecutors plan to file murder and conspiracy charges [JURIST report] against seven Marines and a Navy corpsman. AFP has more.

[JURIST] President Bush Monday denounced "activist judges" who have struck down state laws banning same-sex marriage [JURIST news archive] as he urged Congress to approve the so-called Marriage Protection Amendment [text, PDF] defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. At a White House event, Bush said [transcript]:

Some argue that defining marriage should be left to the states. The fact is, state legislatures are trying to address this issue. But across the country, they are being thwarted by activist judges who are overturning the expressed will of their people. And these court decisions can have an impact on our whole nation.

[JURIST] Serbian members of parliament declared Serbia [JURIST news archive] a sovereign nation Monday, two days after the parliament of Montenegro proclaimed its own independence [JURIST report] from the former Serbia-Montenegro union. The breakup marks the final dissolution of what remained of the post-WWII Federal Republic of Yugoslavia [Wikipedia backgrounder], now divided into six successor states (the others being Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, and Slovenia). As provided for in the constitution of Serbia-Montenegro [text], the parliament on Monday transferred the federation's international status [press release] to Serbia alone, which now holds the seats in the United Nations and other international bodies. The deputies also voted to resolve remaining disputes with Montenegro within 45 days. After the parliament session, the flag of Serbia-Montenegro was lowered and replaced with that of Serbia. Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica pledged to forge a new constitution [press release] for Serbia with the consensus of the various political parties.

Last month, voters in Montenegro narrowly approved a referendum [JURIST report; CDT materials] calling for Montenegro's independence. The country's referendum commission confirmed [JURIST report] that 55.5% percent of voters had backed the referendum; the EU required a 55 percent majority. AFP has more.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website] on Monday granted certiorari in a case that will decide how much public schools can consider race in public school admissions assignments. The Court will hear appeals in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District [docket], and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education [docket]. In Parents, the Ninth Circuit upheld [text, PDF] a school policy allowing a Seattle school board to use race as a tiebreaker for admission to schools with more applicants than seats in a school. Parents Involved in Community Schools challenged the Seattle districting plan and appealed the Ninth Circuit decision based on Grutter v. Bollinger [text], a 2003 Supreme Court decision allowing public universities to consider race, in part, in their admissions process. In Meredith, the Sixth Circuit upheld [text, PDF] a student assignment plan used by public schools in Jefferson County, Kentucky, which includes racial guidelines implemented in 2001 after a court-mandated desegregation order from 1974 had ended. AP has more.

The Supreme Court Monday also granted certiorari in a case that will decide whether prisoners can reopen challenges to their prison sentences based on the court's ruling two years ago in Blakely v. Washington [text, PDF], which limited judges' discretion in criminal sentencing. Burton v. Waddington [docket], 05-9222, involves the 47-year prison sentence of a man convicted in Washington state for rape, robbery and burglary, and will likely decide whether Blakely should be applied retroactively. Burton had an appeal pending when his case was resolved by the Blakely decision. Attorneys for Burton challenge the Ninth Circuit denial [PDF] of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that the state judge increased Burton's sentence by 21 years, stating that Burton deserved a harsher sentence. AP has more. Read the Court's full Order List [PDF]. SCOTUSblog has additional coverage.

[JURIST] A Baghdad court has convicted one man but acquitted two others in connection with the abduction and murder of Margaret Hassan [BBC profile], the Irish-born aid worker kidnapped in Iraq in 2004 [JURIST report]. Mustafa Salman, charged with aiding and abetting the kidnappers after Hassan's purse and identification papers were found in his home, was sentenced to life in prison. Salman told the court he had been given a plastic bag containing Hassan's belongings by the sheikh of a mosque near Baghdad. Muhssin Ahmed and Qassim Muhammad, who were associated with the same mosque, were found not guilty and were released.

Hassan, who had Irish, British and Iraqi citizenship, was head of the Iraq office of the humanitarian group CARE International [advocacy website]. She was abducted in October 2004, and a videotape that surfaced the next month [JURIST report] appeared to show her being shot to death. Her body has not been found, and no group has claimed responsibility. On Monday, Hassan's relatives lashed out at the British government, calling officials' handling of the case "inept." Hassan's sister Deidre Fitzsimons told BBC radio [recorded audio] that the UK Foreign Office [official website] refused to interview the suspects to determine the location of Hassan's body. The Guardian has more. Aljazeera has additional coverage.

[JURIST] Several activist groups have sued the attorney general of Indonesia [JURIST news archive] for dropping corruption charges against former President Suharto [CNN profile]. Attorney General Abdul Rahman Saleh dismissed the charges last month [JURIST report] because of the former dictator's health. The lawsuits -- filed by the Indonesian Association of Legal Attorneys and Human Rights Counselors, the Advocacy Team for the Trial of Suharto and former student activists -- will be heard together, Presiding Judge Andi Samsang Nganro of the South Jakarta district court ruled Monday. The Advocacy Team argues that the charges can be dropped only if the evidence is insufficient or if the defendant dies. Another hearing in the case is scheduled for Tuesday.

Suharto, ousted from power after 32 years in 1998 amid violent protests against his three-decade dictatorship, was charged with misusing more than half a billion US dollars, including money from charitable foundations that he established. A court ruled in April [JURIST report] that he was unfit to stand trial at age 84 because he had suffered permanent brain damage and could not carry on a conversation. The former strongman was released from a hospital last week [BBC report] after treatment for intestinal bleeding following colon surgery. AFP has more.

[JURIST] The US Defense Department [official website] has decided to omit references to common Article 3 [text] of the Geneva Conventions [ICRC materials], which bans "cruel treatment and torture" and "humiliating and degrading treatment" of detainees, from the new Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation [current text] and accompanying directives, an anonymous military official told the Los Angeles Times. The decision to omit specific references to Article 3 will not be final until the Pentagon officially releases the new field manual and implementing directives, which it was scheduled to do last April. The US State Department [official website] has been adamant in its opposition to omitting Geneva Convention protections, contending that including Article 3 in the field manual and official US interrogation guidelines will make it easier to defend US policies abroad by placing the US government on a better "moral footing." Pentagon officials, however, are concerned that the inclusion of Article 3 references could allow established interrogation techniques, such as segregating detainees or questioning a male detainee's manhood, to be challenged in US courts. A senior defense official, speaking anonymously, said that the planned detainee directive is based on Article 3, but "there are certain things unlawful combatants are not entitled to."

The Pentagon has been working on a new version of the manual since the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib [JURIST news archive] surfaced in 2004, but has struggled to come to an agreement [JURIST report] on revisions. Delays in its release have been attributed to attempts to legitimize different interrogation techniques and allow the army to obtain timely intelligence from prisoners, while complying with the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 [JURIST document], a measure pushed through Congress last year by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) [official website] that explicitly prohibits any cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of persons in custody of the US government. High level military attorneys in May told Congress that some interrogation methods at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] are not consistent with the field manual [JURIST report], calling some tactics humiliating and degrading. Julian Barnes of the Los Angeles Times has more.

[JURIST] The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) [official website] said Monday that there may be more arrests in the terror investigation that led Friday to the detention and charging of 12 men and five youths [JURIST report] suspected of being members of a terrorist cell that planned to attack targets in southern Ontario and Toronto, including - according to Monday's Globe and Mail - the CN Tower [tower website] and the Peace Tower [Wikipedia backgrounder] on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. The 17, also suspected of attending a terror training camp near Toronto, allegedly gathered three tons of common makeshift bomb ingredient ammonium nitrate fertilizer, three times the amount used in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing that killed 168 people. The suspects have been charged under the terrorism provisions of Section 83 [text] of the Canadian Criminal Code. The Toronto Star has reported that the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service [official website] began its investigation by watching an internet chatroom on 2004 after users made anti-Western comments, and soon after contacted the RCMP for a criminal investigation. CTV has more.

In a related development, vandals in Toronto broke nearly 30 windows of a mosque [news release, PDF] over the weekend and damaged cars in the vicinity, shortly after Canadian authorities announced the terror arrests. Canadian officials have no information indicating that the attack on the Toronto mosque was directly related to the arrests, but president of the Islamic Foundation of Toronto [advocacy website] Mohammad Alam nonetheless expressed fear that the mosque attack might be the beginning of religously motivated attacks against Canada's 600,000 Muslims. Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair has nonetheless insisted that if the mosque attack was religiously motivated, it "will not be tolerated in our community." Reuters has more. Canadian Press has local coverage.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] on Monday ruled that a company cannot bring a claim under s.1962(c) of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) [text] alleging that a competitor fraudulently failed to collect sales tax on its products. In Anza v. Ideal Steal Supply Corp. [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report], Ideal sued National Steel Supply (owned by the Anza family) under RICO, alleging that National Steel Supply did not collect a New York sales tax from customers paying in cash which allowed it to significantly undercut Ideal's business. The Court overturned the Second Circuit's ruling [PDF] on the alleged 1962(c) violation - that provision prohibits conducting or participating in the conduct of an company's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity - ruling that the connection between Ideal's injury and National Steel's conduct was too attenuated. The Court also directed the Second Circuit to reconsider Ideal's argument that National Steel violated s.1962(a) of RICO, which prohibits a person for using or investing income derived from racketeering activity in a business engaged in or affecting interstate commerce, in light of the Court's decision. Read the Court's opinion [text] per Justice Kennedy, along with a concurrence [text] from Justice Scalia, a partial dissent [text] from Justice Thomas and a second partial dissent [text] from Justice Breyer. AP has more.

In light of its decision in Anza, the Court ordered the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to reconsider Mohawk Industries v. Williams [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report]. In Mohawk, the Court heard arguments on whether a corporation and its agents constitute an "enterprise" under the RICO; in order for civil RICO liability to attach, the defendant must "conduct" or "participate in" affairs of a larger enterprise beyond its own internal affairs. Mohawk employees sued the company, alleging that the company conspired with third-party recruiters to hire illegal immigrants in order to reduce labor costs. The Eleventh Circuit last year affirmed [opinion, PDF] the district court's holding that the company's collaborations with the recruiters constitutes an "enterprise" under RICO. In its per curiam decision [PDF text], however, the Court dismissed its grant of review on that issue, and instead remanded the case to the Eleventh Circuit for consideration, under Anza, of whether the plaintiffs properly stated proximately caused injuries, an issue which the Court had initially declined to hear when it granted certiorari last December.

In Zedner v. United States [Duke Law case backgrounder], the Court held that a defendant cannot prospectively waive application of the Speedy Trial Act [DOJ backgrounder] and, therefore, that a defendant's waiver of his right under the Act "for all time" is ineffective. The Act requires that a federal criminal trial begin within 70 days of an indictment or a defendant's initial appearance, but allows for delays that are "excluded" by the court. In Zedner's case, after two continuances had been granted and Zedner requested another delay, the Court suggested that Zedner waive application of the Act "for all time." After Zedner agreed to waive application, the district court did not enter orders excluding further delays. The Court reversed the Second Circuit's ruling [PDF text], saying that Zedner's waiver of his rights under the Act was ineffective. Read the Court's opinion [text] per Justice Alito, along with a concurrence [text] from Justice Scalia.

In the final decision handed down Monday, the Court remanded Whitman v. Department of Transportation [Duke Law case backgrounder] back to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The federal appeals court had upheld [opinion, PDF] the lower court's dismissal of Whitman's lawsuit alleging that the Department of Transportation had violated his constitutional rights by misapplying its random drug testing policies. In dismissing the case, the lower courts reasoned that they lacked jurisdiction to hear the dispute because the suit was governed by the Civil Service Reform Act [text] and should have been resolved under the applicable collective bargaining agreement. The Supreme Court remanded the case, directing the Ninth Circuit to resolve certain questions that would determine whether CSRA removes jurisdiction given to courts under the federal question statute or precludes employees affected by CSRA from pursuing alternate remedies other than those outlined in the statute. Read the Court's per curiam opinion [PDF].

[JURIST] A Chinese court has overturned a 2004 decision by the country's patent review board allowing Chinese drug companies to sell counterfeit versions of the Pfizer [corporate website] drug Viagra [product website], upholding Pfizer's patent and signaling China's intent to crack down on intellectual property rights violations, an official at the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court confirmed Monday. The landmark ruling is consistent with China's undertaking to strengthen patent protections after it was welcomed into the World Trade Organization [official website] in 2001. Pfizer had appealed [JURIST report] the decision to China's State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) [official website], maintaining that it owned the patent to sildenafil citrate, Viagra's main ingredient.

A spokesman for Guangzhou Baiyunshan Pharmaceutical, one of the twelve Chinese companies that wants to sell a generic version of Viagra without paying royalties, stated that it may appeal the decision. Pfizer has applauded the decision, hoping that it will spur better patent protections for 20 additional drugs that Pfizer intends to introduce on the China market by 2010. Viagra was introduced on the China market in 2000, and within six months of its introduction, more than 90 percent of the Viagra pills sold in Shanghai were actually counterfeit. BBC News has more. Bloomberg has additional coverage.

[JURIST] Nepal officials on Sunday released three former ministers in the cabinet of the recently-dissolved royal government after the country's Supreme Court [official website] ruled that it could find no evidence for their continued detention. Former home minister Ramesh Nath Pandev, former foreign minister Nichhya Sumshere Rana and former state information and communications minister Srish Sumshere Rana were arrested [JURIST report] in May under popular pressure for "trying to suppress the recent pro-democracy movement" after King Gyanendra [official profile] restored parliament after over a year of direct rule [JURIST report].

Two other former royal ministers who did not file a petition for release remain in jail. AP has more. eKantipur.com has local coverage.

[JURIST] Defense lawyers in the Saddam Hussein trial [JURIST news archive] resumed their case Monday after chief judge Raouf Abdel-Rahman [BBC profile] said that four defense witnesses accused of perjury last week had been arrested and could therefore not attend Monday's session. Hussein's defense team last week accused the prosecution [JURIST report] of trying to bribe one defense witness to testify against Hussein, and later stated that US and Iraqi officials had illegally detained the four witnesses [JURIST report]. Defense lawyers filed a protest [AP report] against the arrests Monday, and told the court that the witnesses had been beaten by Iraqi soldiers when taken into custody.

Monday's session began with two witnesses for one of Hussein's seven co-defendants, Ali Daeem Ali, testifying as character witnesses. Abdel-Rahman criticized the defense for not having any other witnesses prepared and adjourned the case until June 12. The defense team, which began its case in mid-May, has presented 57 witnesses, including 19 witnesses for Hussein, according to Abdel-Rahman. Hussein and his seven co-defendants are charged [JURIST report] with killing, torturing and illegally detaining Dujail residents in a crackdown prompted by an alleged 1982 assassination attempt against Hussein. Reuters has more. AP has additional coverage.

[JURIST] The number of Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees on hunger strike decreased from 89 to 18 over the weekend, US military officials said Sunday. The number of detainees on hunger strike suddenly jumped from three to 75 [JURIST report] early last week, with an additional 14 [JURIST report] joining the hunger strike late in the week. Detainees appear to have begun eating again right after the number peaked late last week. Guards at Guantanamo continue to force-feed four of the 18 strikers.

The wave of hunger strikes began last summer [JURIST report] and ballooned up to 131 [JURIST report] strikers by September, but the number was significantly lowered after guards enforced aggressive force-feeding measures [JURIST report]. Navy Cmdr. Robert Durand says the striking detainees are trying to pressure the US into releasing them, a move which Durand states is in line with al Qaeda tactics, while human rights group Amnesty International USA [advocacy website] believes the strikes are an appeal for justice [press release] because the detainees have been held for years at Guantanamo without charge. AP has more.