Gomez specifically pointed to the use of contractors by the US in Iraq, and cited that as a reason for the urgent regulation of these agencies: "While US troops are scheduled to leave Iraq by the end of the year, security contractors are there to stay."

A former contractor for Blackwater [JURIST news archive], now known as Xe Services [corporate website], was sentenced [JURIST report] last month to two-and-a-half years in prison for the 2009 shooting of an unarmed Afghan civilian in Kabul. Earlier that 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.

Last year, an Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] report [JURIST report] cited the case of Habre as a prime example of Senegal's "contempt" for the rule of law. In 2009, the African Court on Human and People's Rights (AfCHPR) [official website] found that it lacked jurisdiction [JURIST report] to hear a case against Senegal on whether charges against Habre should be dropped. Habre has been accused of involvement in the murder or torture of more than 40,000 political opponents during his rule from 1982 to 1990. He later fled to Senegal after being removed from power in 1990. Belgium has sought to try him under the principle of universal jurisdiction, but Senegal has long refused extradition. Earlier that year, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) [official website] denied [JURIST report] Belgium's request to compel Habre's extradition. Belgium had accused Senegal of violating international law, including Article 7 of the Convention Against Torture, by not trying Habre in Senegal, where he has lived under house arrest since 1990. The ICJ found that assurances made by Senegal that Habre would remain in custody until trial were sufficient and that "the risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights claimed by Belgium is not apparent."

The federal courts have recently allowed lawsuits alleging violations of the ATS and TVPA for violence overseas by paramilitary troops hired by US corporations. Last month, a judge for the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida [official website] permitted lawsuits [JURIST report] under the ATS and TVPA against Chiquita Brand International [corporate website] to move forward. Family members of several thousand victims of paramilitary violence in Colombia filed suit against Chiquita Brand International, which has admitted to funding United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) [CDI backgrounder], a right-wing paramilitary group in Colombia. In May, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] allowed a lawsuit by Argentine citizens against Daimler AG [official website] for the actions of Mercedes-Benz Argentina [official website, in Spanish] during the nation's 1976-1983 "Dirty War" [GlobalSecurity backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. The suit, which was dismissed by the US District Court for the Northern District of California [official website] in 2005 due to a lack of jurisdiction, alleges that Mercedes-Benz Argentina "collaborated with state security forces to kidnap, detain, torture, and kill the plaintiffs and/or their relatives."

Alabama Governor Robert Bentley [official website] signed the HB 56 into law last month a week after it the legislature passed it [JURIST report]. In addition to authorizing detention of individuals on reasonable suspicion they are illegal immigrants, the law provides harsh restrictions on employment for illegal immigrants. Businesses cited multiple times for hiring undocumented workers could lose their business licenses. Furthermore, undocumented immigrants are prohibited from applying for a job, and anyone transporting or harboring undocumented immigrants will be punished by a fine or jail time. In May, the US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] upheld [JURIST report] in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting [Cornell LII backgrounder; JURIST report] an Arizona employment law that imposes penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants is not preempted by the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) [text]. The ruling opens the door for states to enact similar restraints on immigration.Similar laws have been passed in Indiana, Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, Oklahoma and Utah [JURIST reports]. Federal courts have enjoined the laws in Arizona, Indiana, Georgia, Oklahoma, and Utah [JURIST reports].

This way [a coup] of processing the political crisis, using a procedure outside the law, using force to oust the president abroad and using the military to resolve a political conflict, first, showed the low capacity of the political class to reach an agreement and, second, the inability of democratic institutions to resolve the crisis using the mechanisms and provisions of the laws of Honduras.

Zelaya signed an agreement [JURIST report] in May allowing his return to the country after nearly two years in exile. Earlier that month, a Honduran court dismissed the two remaining conspiracy charges [JURIST report] against Zelaya, clearing the way for his return to the country. In March, the Center for Constitutional Rights [advocacy website] filed a complaint [text, PDF] to compel the release of documents related to the coup [JURIST report]. The complaint names the US Department of Defense and Central Intelligence Agency [official websites] as defendants, alleging the agencies withheld documents regarding if and how the US government and its interests affected the coup. In November, International Criminal Court [official website] chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo [official profile] opened a preliminary investigation [JURIST report] into the coup. Last July, a Honduran court dismissed abuse of power charges against Zelaya because his successor granted amnesty [JURIST reports] to Zelaya and those involved in his removal. In June 2010, Amnesty International [advocacy website] accused the Honduran government [JURIST report] of failing to address human rights violations stemming from the coup. AI contends that hundreds of people opposed to the coup were beaten and detained.

This budget may target Planned Parenthood, but the men, women and teens of North Carolina are the ultimate victims of this discriminatory legislation. This is the first time in North Carolina's history that a single health care provider has been carved out in the budget and banned from applying for competitive grants from the state. ... Not only is this bill bad policy, but it's also bad politics. We hope the court will work to protect the people we serve, and will ensure that Planned Parenthood can continue to receive state and federal funding to assist us in providing critical health services to North Carolina women, men, and teens.

Last month, Perdue also vetoed [JURIST report] a North Carolina bill that would have required women seeking an abortion to wait 24 hours and to view an ultrasound of the fetus before an abortion [JURIST news archive]. Perdue called it "a dangerous intrusion into the confidential relationship that exists between women and their doctors." Indiana is appealing [JURIST report] the preliminary injunction to its denial of funding for Planned Parenthood of Indiana (PPIN) [advocacy website]. The Obama administration has taken a stance against the Indiana law an the US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] filed a brief urging the court to grant an injunction [JURIST report] to stop the enforcement of the law. The ban includes disbursement of grant money, including federal Medicare funds, a provision PPIN claims is not legal under the federal Medicaid Act's "freedom of choice" provision, which allows states to disallow Medicare funding for medical providers based on deficiencies in quality of service. In May, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton vetoed a pair of bills [JURIST report] that would have restricted state funding for abortions and banned them altogether after 20 weeks.

Piracy remains an issue of international concern, as few countries have been willing to prosecute suspected pirates. In April, a Somali pirate was sentenced [JURIST report] by the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] to 25 years in prison for attacking a Danish ship off the coast of Somalia in 2008, for which he and other pirates received a $1.7 million ransom. The few countries that have attempted to prosecute them include Germany, Seychelles, the Netherlands, Mauritius, Yemen, Somalia and Spain [JURIST reports].

First, we are doubtful that it is ever appropriate to stay a lower court judgment in light of unenacted legislation. Our task is to rule on what the law is, not what it might eventually be. In light of Medellin I, it is clear that there is no "fair prospect that a majority of the Court will conclude that the decision below was erroneous," and our task should be at an end. Neither the United States nor Justice Breyer cites a single instance in this Court's history in which a stay issued under analogous circumstances. Even if there were circumstances under which a stay could issue in light of proposed legislation, this case would not present them. ... It has now been seven years since the ICJ ruling and three years since our decision in Medellin I, making a stay based on the bare introduction of a bill in a single house of Congress even less justified. If a statute implementing Avena had genuinely been a priority for the political branches, it would have been enacted by now.

Thus, on the one hand, international legal obligations, related foreign policy considerations, the prospect of legislation, and the consequent injustice involved should that legislation, coming too late for Leal, help others in identical circumstances all favor granting a stay. And issuing a brief stay until the end of September, when the Court could consider this matter in the ordinary course, would put Congress on clear notice that it must act quickly. On the other hand, the State has an interest in proceeding with an immediate execution. But it is difficult to see how the State's interest in the immediate execution of an individual convicted of capital murder 16 years ago can outweigh the considerations that support additional delay, perhaps only until the end of the summer. Consequently I would grant the stay that the petitioner requests. In reaching its contrary conclusion, the Court ignores the appeal of the President in a matter related to foreign affairs, it substitutes its own views about the likelihood of congressional action for the views of Executive Branch officials who have consulted with Members of Congress, and it denies the request by four Members of the Court to delay the execution until the Court can discuss the matter at Conference in September. In my view, the Court is wrong in each respect.

A stay to Leal Garcia's execution garnered international support. Officials from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] appealed [JURIST report] directly to Texas Governor Rick Perry [official website] alleging Leal Garcia did not receive a fair trial. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] wrote a personal letter to Perry asking for Leal Garcia's sentence to be commuted. Letters of support for Leal Garcia arrived from several nations, including Mexico, Chile, El Salvador, Honduras, Switzerland, Uruguay, as well as the EU. Former president George W. Bush denounced the sentence when he was in office, issuing an executive memoranda [text, PDF] that Texas had to comply with the ICJ's ruling in approximately 50 Mexican nationals' planned executions. The Supreme Court ruled in Medellin v. Texas that Bush did not have the authority to direct a state court to comply with a ruling from the ICJ. However, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that Congress could make the treaty binding in domestic law. Texas has already executed two Mexican nationals [JURIST report] who were denied consular access.

The recent House votes show limited support for US military operations in Libya after the expiration of presidential authority under the War Powers Act. However, President Barack Obama [official website] has released a report arguing he is not violating the War Powers Act [JURIST report] since the US is merely providing support as is required by several international treaties and does not have enough participation in the conflict to declare war. However, it was reported that Obama came to this conclusion on the advice of White House counsel, overriding the official interpretations [JURIST report] of both the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel [official websites]. Last month, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) [official website] had threatened to defund the mission after sending Obama a letter earlier in the month warning him that he was within five days of violating the War Powers Act. Also last month, Kucinich and Walter Jones (R-NC) [official websites] filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] seeking to enjoin further action in Libya. Obama's report endorsed a pending resolution [bill materials] that would provide some congressional support for continued efforts in Libya, though not approval of declaring war. The report also detailed that the US has spent USD $716 million and will spend $1.1 billion by the end of September.

For more see JURIST's Feature on the Libya Conflict.