The US House of Representatives [official website] in two votes last week sent contradictory messages [JURIST report] over authorization of US military operations in Libya, voting down 123-295 [roll call vote] a resolution [HJ RES 68] that would have authorized further operations in Libya, and later voting down 180-238 [roll call vote] a measure [HR 2278] that would have defunded the operations, save for rescue and intelligence efforts to assist NATO. Obama disagrees with certain members of Congress regarding his legal authority to continue military operations in Libya. Obama's position is that he is not in violation [JURIST report] of the War Powers Resolution. His office maintains that US activities in Libya do not amount to "hostilities" because the US is only playing a supporting role in the NATO-led mission pursuant to and limited by the UN Security Council Resolution authorizing military action in Libya to protect civilians. But earlier this week, it was reported that Obama came to this conclusion overriding the legal interpretations [JURIST report] of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel [official websites]. Jordan Paust [academic profile] of the University of Houston Law Center has argued [JURIST op-ed] that Obama is not violating the War Powers Resolution because the resolution was meant to limit only his authority as Commander-In-Chief. In this case, Obama is acting pursuant to his Executive authority under Article II [text]. Paust argues: "given the fact that treaties of the United States (such as the UN Charter) are supreme federal laws, it is evident that the President has constitutionally-based authority to faithfully execute US competencies under the Charter outside of the President's independent authority as Commander-in-Chief."

Last week, Moreno-Ocampo presented the arrest warrants' supporting materials to Pre-Trial Chamber. He said his office had gathered "direct evidence" [JURIST report] that shows Gaddafi personally ordered attacks on civilian protestors and that his forces used live ammunition on crowds, attacked civilians in their homes, used heavy weapons against people in funeral processions and placed snipers to shoot those leaving mosques after prayer services. Moreno-Ocampo announced [JURIST report] last month that his office was pursuing arrest warrants against Gaddafi and the two others in his "inner circle." He said Saif al-Islam was acting as Gaddafi's "de facto Prime Minister" and called al-Sanussi Gaddafi's "right-hand man" and "executioner." At that time, Moreno-Ocampo said his office was almost prepared for trial, having collected quality testimony from some who have fled Libya. There have been numerous allegations of war crimes and human rights violations over the Libyan revolt which has persisted since February. Earlier this month, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website] decided to extend a mandate to an investigative panel instructing it to continue its investigation of human rights abuses in Libya, after it published a 92-page report [JURIST reports]. The report claims Libyan authorities have committed crimes against humanity such as acts constituting murder, imprisonment and other severe deprivations of physical liberties, torture, forced disappearances and rape "as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population with knowledge of the attack."

The bill contains provisions that are the most extreme in the nation in terms of interfering with that relationship. Physicians must be free to advise and treat their patients based on their medical knowledge and expertise and not have their advice overridden by elected officials seeking to impose their own ideological agenda on others.

Several other state legislatures have acted recently to limit abortion rights. Both Texas and Florida [JURIST reports] have recently passed bills requiring ultrasounds before abortions. Earlier this month, the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) [advocacy website] filed a lawsuit challenging the Texas law [JURIST report]. In March, South Dakota passed a law requiring a three-day waiting period [JURIST report] before an abortion—the longest waiting period in the country. That law is also facing a court challenge [JURIST report]. Multiple states have acted to ban abortions after 20 weeks, when some studies suggest a fetus can begin feeling pain, including Missouri, Indiana, Alabama, Ohio, Oklahoma, Kansas and Idaho [JURIST reports].

The TSA announced a policy change [USA Today report] in June that seeks to reduce the number of invasive pat-downs of children under age 12. Perry commended the TSA [press release] for making the change, indicating that "Texas will continue seeking more common-sense approaches to TSA security measures." The TSA has faced criticism for other tight security measures. In April 2010, a group of more than 30 privacy and civil liberty groups asked [petition, PDF; JURIST report] the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) [official website] to suspend the full body scanner [TSA backgrounder] program being implemented by the TSA. The body scanners were introduced in part as a response to the failed US bombing attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab [Telegraph profile; JURIST news archive] on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day. The attempted attack prompted Obama to announce tighter security measures, which civil rights groups opposed [JURIST reports] as a pretext to racial profiling.

The Supreme Court will also hear Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency [docket; cert. petition, PDF] in which petitioners are challenging whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] can enforce a compliance order issued without any opportunity to contest the order. The Sacketts own land near Priest Lake, Idaho on which they intended to build a house. After purchasing the property and obtaining local permits, they began to grade the land for construction of a house. They received an EPA Administrative Compliance Order that said the grading of the land was in violation of the Clean Water Act (CWA) [text, PDF] and imposed harsh civil penalties for non-compliance. The Sacketts disagree that their property is a wetland under the meaning of the CWA. The case raises the issue of whether the CWA precludes pre-enforcement judicial review, and if so, whether that violates the petitioner's Due Process [Cornell LII backgrounder] rights. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] upheld [opinion, PDF] the dismissal of the suit.

Cannon and Drotleff were originally indicted [indictment, PDF] in January 2010, but were charged under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act [text, PDF] in a superseding indictment in August. They were initially tried in September, but the judge declared a mistrial [JURIST report] after the jury failed to reach a verdict. Earlier this month, four former Blackwater contractors appealed the April decision to reinstate manslaughter charges against them in connection with their alleged roles in a 2007 shooting incident [JURIST reports] in Baghdad, Iraq. In April 2010, a federal grand jury indicted five former Blackwater executives [JURIST report] on charges of weapons violations and lying to investigators. In February 2010, the Iraqi government ordered 250 former Blackwater employees to leave Iraq [JURIST report] in reaction to the dismissal of charges against former Blackwater employees accused in the deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians [JURIST report] in 2007. That month, the Department of Justice [official website] also opened an investigation [JURIST report] into whether Blackwater bribed the Iraqi government to be permitted to continue operating in Iraq following the 2007 shootings. Blackwater ceased operations in Baghdad [JURIST report] in May 2009 when its security contracts expired and were not renewed.

The court also denied certiorari in Heydt-Benjamin v. Heydt-Benjamin [docket], thereby declining to clarify the test for determining a child's country of habitual residence for purposes of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction [text]. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit [official website] summarily ordered [text, PDF] that the petitioner's two children remain in the US with their father instead of returning to Switzerland pursuant to the second circuit's interpretation of the international child abduction law. Some courts look at the "shared intent of the parents," while others determine whether the child has acclimatized to the new environment such that the new location constitutes the child's habitual residence. In her petition for writ of certiorari [text, PDF], the mother argued that, because the circuit courts disagree on which test to apply, the court should grant certiorari to declare one uniform test.

The Supreme Court also turned down an appeal in Saleh v. Titan Corp. [docket; cert. petition, PDF ]. Plaintiff Iraqi nationals brought suits against two private US military contractors that provided services to the US government at the Abu Ghraib military prison during the war in Iraq. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed a district court judgment holding that claims for torture and other war crimes cannot be brought against private actors under the Alien Tort Statute [28 USC § 1350] and creating a "battle-field preemption" doctrine that extends sovereign immunity to contractors. The appeals court indicated that judicial restraint is required particularly in cases "where foreign policy prerogatives of our executive and legislative branches" are at issue.

Finally, Justice Antonin Scalia dissented [text, PDF] from denial of certiorari in four criminal cases, collectively Derby v. US, involving the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) [18 USC § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii) text]. Scalia wrote that the rule the court has announced for applying that clause is unclear. He expressed dissatisfaction that his colleagues failed to grant certiorari in those cases in order to declare the ACCA's residual clause unconstitutionally vague.

The Georgia suit does not mark the first time the ACLU and other groups have taken legal action against immigration laws in recent months. Last month, the ACLU filed a class action suit challenging an Indiana immigration law [JURIST report] that requires individuals to provide proof of their legal status at all times and calls for all public meetings, websites and documents to be in English only. Also last month, the ACLU and other groups filed a class action suit against a Utah immigration law [JURIST report] that requires police to check the immigration status of anyone arrested for an alleged felony or serious misdemeanor. Federal judges have enjoined both the Indiana and Utah laws [JURIST reports]. Similar legislation has been approved in Alabama, Virginia and Oklahoma [JURIST reports]. Arizona's legislation, signed into law last April, is currently enjoined, and Governor Jan Brewer has pledged to appeal to the US Supreme Court [JURIST reports].

Mujicia, a leftist Senator and farmer, was elected to the presidency in a close election in November 2009. He co-founded the Tupamaro movement, an urban guerrilla force that opposed the military junta. Prior to November's judgment, Uruguay's Supreme Court had largely upheld the amnesty except in extreme circumstances, and in 2009 a popular vote failed to overturn the law [JURIST reports]. Many of the alleged kidnappings and deaths occurred in connection with Operation Condor [BBC backgrounder], a cooperative effort between the governments of Uruguay, Chile, Paraguay, Argentina, Brazil and Chile to eliminate left-wing political opponents. In June, ex-military officials in Argentina were put on trial [JURIST report] for the deaths of 65 activists in connection with Operation Condor. The Uruguayan government has also attempted to bring those responsible for the disappearance of leftist activist to justice. In 2006, eight former police and military officers were indicted by a Uruguayan court [JURIST report] on counts of kidnapping and conspiracy committed during the 1973-1985 dictatorship. The crimes were related to the 1976 disappearances of five members of an Uruguayan leftist group who fled to Argentina and were detained there by police, and who investigators suspect were victims of Operation Condor.