Proposition 8 violates plaintiffs' equal protection and due process rights, and the court presumes harm where plaintiffs have shown a violation of a constitutional right. But no presumption is necessary here, as the trial record left no doubt that Proposition 8 inflicts harm on plaintiffs and other gays and lesbians in California. Any stay would serve only to delay plaintiffs access to the remedy to which they have shown they are entitled. ... [A] stay would force California to continue to violate plaintiffs' constitutional rights and would demonstrably harm plaintiffs and other gays and lesbians in California[.]

On Friday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Attorney General Jerry Brown and others filed motions [JURIST report] opposing the stay request. Schwarzenegger and Brown were originally defendants in the lawsuit against Proposition 8, now leaving defendant-intervenors Protect Marriage [advocacy website] and other groups to defend the law. The Alliance Defense Fund [advocacy website], another party defending the law, called the decision a "disappointing one" [press release] which "gut[s] the core of the American democratic system." The organization has stated that it will appeal the case to the Supreme Court if necessary.

IPI believes that any Media Appeals Tribunal will not be independent. If the MAT is appointed by parliament, it will face an inherent conflict of interest that will skew its rulings in favour of public and party officials and essentially amount to government oversight of the media—which is unacceptable .... [T]he [Protection of Information] Bill provides for a very low threshold for the classification of information, but at the same time imposes draconian penalties on those who reveal that information—without providing for a public interest defense ... an unfair penalty system that encourages secrecy and could lead to the erosion of investigative journalism.

On Sunday, a group of South African journalists expressed disdain [statement; JURIST report] for the proposed regulations, claiming they will inhibit freedom of expression. This is not the first sign of tension between the ANC and the South African media. Recently, there have been many reports on Zuma's lavish spending on luxury vehicles. In 2005, the Johannesburg High Court banned the release [JURIST report] of a newspaper article revealing a corruption scandal involving the nation's ruling ANC, requiring South Africa's leading independent newspaper, the Mail and Guardian [media website] to prevent the distribution of its entire 45,000 issue run.

Under federal law, affected states are guaranteed the right to participate in offshore drilling-related policy decisions, but the Obama Administration did not bother to communicate, coordinate or cooperate with Texas. Worse, the Secretary of the Interior failed to consider the economic consequences of his decision, which will cost the Texas economy millions of dollars - and threatens far too many hard-working Texans' jobs.

Last month, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar issued a new six-month drilling moratorium [JURIST report], citing new evidence regarding safety concerns after the BP oil spill. Unlike the previously ordered moratorium, which a federal judge blocked [JURIST report] in June, this one is not based on the depths at which drilling occurs. Instead, the moratorium affects drilling with specific technologies, although the applicable technologies are most often used during deepwater drilling and will not affect shallow water drilling operations. The new plan, the government says, offers more specifics on the types of drilling that will and will not be blocked. More than 200 million gallons of oil leaked from a broken pipe in BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig, surpassing the Exxon Valdez oil spill [JURIST news archive] as the worst in US history.

[In ruling for the plaintiffs,] [w]e would have to hold that any compliant response to an expression of political opinion critical of a school library's selection of books would violate a First Amendment right to free enquiry on the part of library patrons[.] ... When it comes to judicial supervision of school curriculums, all [precedent] point[s] in the same direction and against extending the Pico plurality's notion of non-interference with school libraries as a constitutional basis for limiting the discretion of state authorities to set curriculum.

The Armenian genocide remains a contentious issue in US politics and law. In March, the Obama administration announced its opposition to a resolution [JURIST report] labeling the World War I-era killings as genocide. The announcement came after the US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs passed the resolution [JURIST report] by a vote of 23-22. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Teyyip Erdogan condemned the resolution, and the Turkish government recalled its ambassador to the US. In 2009, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] ruled that a California state law that allows descendants of victims of the genocide to sue in state courts [JURIST report] for unpaid insurance benefits is unconstitutional. The court found that it "interfer[ed] with the national government's conduct of foreign relations" because the federal government has declined to describe the World War I-era killings of over one million Armenians by Turkish soldiers as genocide.

The Israeli government has established two internal commissions to investigate its response to the flotilla, one military and one civilian [JURIST reports]. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu [official website; BBC profile] testified before the civilian commission Monday that Israel did not violate international law [JURIST report]. During his testimony, Netanyahu expressed confidence that the commission would find Israeli actions to be in compliance with international law and explained the Israeli response to the flotilla in the context of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas [CFR backgrounder]. Netanyahu continued to accuse Hamas of "at least four war crimes: inciting to genocide; systematically and intentionally firing on civilians; using civilians as human shields; and preventing visits by the Red Cross to kidnapped IDF soldier, Gilad Shalit." Earlier this month, an Israeli military probe found insufficient intelligence and planning [JURIST report] in the raid in a report, but also concluded that no punishments were necessary. Israeli forces raided six ships attempting to deliver more than 10,000 tons of aid to Gaza in May. The raid left numerous wounded and resulted in the deaths of nine pro-Palestine activists—eight Turks and one American.

Al Qosi's sentencing marks the fourth time a Guantanamo detainee has been convicted by a military tribunal since the detention center opened in 2002 and the first time a captive has been convicted since the Obama administration ordered the facility shut down [JURIST report] in 2009. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] recently reiterated its call to end military commissions [press release] and try Guantanamo detainees in civilian courts. Al Qosi has been detained at Guantanamo since he was transferred there from Afghanistan in 2002. In December, a military judge ruled that the US government could partially amend the charges [JURIST report] against al Qosi by changing his jurisdictional basis but could not include four additional years of alleged activities under the charges. In October, military judges granted continuances [JURIST report] for prosecutors in the case against al Qosi. At the time, it was expected that the continuances would make way for a decision on whether to hold the remaining Guantanamo detainee proceedings in civilian or military court.

McCollum's staff attorneys made changes to the proposed legislation in response to a ruling by a federal judge in Arizona [JURIST report] two weeks ago that enjoined several provisions of Arizona's immigration law, which was set to go into effect at the end of last month. Judge Susan Bolton sided with the US Department of Justice [official website] in determining that provisions of the law could impair the government's ability to enforce federal immigration policy and violate the Supremacy Clause [LII backgrounder] of the US Constitution. Bolton enjoined several provisions, including those requiring verification of the immigration status of individuals reasonably suspected of being illegal immigrants and authorizing warrantless arrests of those police have probable cause to believe have committed an offense that could lead to deportation. Bolton also enjoined a provision requiring non-citizens to carry their immigration papers with them at all times. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) [official website] filed an expedited appeal [JURIST report] to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] asking them to lift the injunction, which the court subsequently denied the next day [JURIST report]. A hearing in the matter is set to occur the week of November 1.