 |
|

Legal news from Thursday, May 10, 2012 |
 |
|


DOJ files discrimination suit against Arizona sheriff
Jaclyn Belczyk on May 10, 2012 2:07 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] filed suit [complaint, PDF; press release] Thursday against Maricopa County, Arizona, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, and Sheriff Joe Arpaio [official websites] alleging discriminatory conduct. The DOJ claims that Arpaio and his department engaged in a pattern or practice of discriminatory and unlawful law enforcement actions against Latinos. According to the complaint, "Latinos in Maricopa County are frequently stopped, detained, and arrested on the basis of race, color, or national origin, and Latino prisoners with limited English language skills are denied important constitutional protections." The DOJ is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to ensure that the sheriff's office implements policies to prevent discriminatory conduct. Speaking at a press conference [text], Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Thomas Perez said:The police are supposed to protect and serve our communities, not divide them. At its core, this is an abuse of power case involving a sheriff and sheriff’s office that disregarded the Constitution, ignored sound police practices, compromised public safety, and did not hesitate to retaliate against perceived critics. Constitutional policing and effective policing go hand-in-hand. Our complaint alleges that the defendants’ actions were neither constitutional nor effective. The suit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Arizona [official website].
The DOJ conducted a comprehensive and independent investigation initiated in June 2008 under Section 14141 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 [text, PDF] and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [DOJ materials]. In December the DOJ issued a 22-page letter of findings [text, PDF], which found reasonable cause that sheriff's office and Arpaio were engaged in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional conduct and violations of federal law. The DOJ attempted to reach a settlement, but negotiations were unsuccessful, and the lawsuit followed. Arpaio, who took office in 1993, has called himself "America's Toughest Sheriff." In 2008 a federal judge ordered him to take steps to remedy overcrowded and unhygienic conditions [JURIST report] in Maricopa County prisons.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Argentina lawmakers approve gender identity law
Max Slater on May 10, 2012 11:58 AM ET

[JURIST] The Argentine Senate [official website, in Spanish] approved a measure on Wednesday that allows people who want sex-change surgery or hormone therapy to have these treatments covered under their public or private health plans. The measure, known as the Gender Identity law, also allows any adult to change his or her gender or birth name on official documents without having to seek approval from a doctor or a judge. The Gender Identity law passed the Senate [Pagina 12 report, in Spanish] by a 55-0 vote, with more than a dozen senators declaring themselves absent. Senator Osvaldo Lopez [official profile, in Spanish], the only openly gay lawmaker in Argentina, praised the Gender Identity law. Argentine President Cristina Fernandez [official website, in Spanish] is expected to sign the measure into law.
Argentina has been at the forefront of gender rights in recent years. In July 2010 Fernandez signed a same-sex marriage bill into law [JURIST report], making Argentina the first Latin American nation to recognize same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder]. In November 2009 the mayor of Buenos Aires said that he would not appeal a court ruling that allowed same-sex marriage[JURIST report] in Argentina's capital. In 2002 Buenos Aires became the first Latin American city to legalize same-sex unions.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Netherlands court orders Internet providers to block file sharing website
Max Slater on May 10, 2012 10:51 AM ET

[JURIST] A Dutch court on Thursday ordered [decision, PDF, in Dutch] Internet service providers (ISPs) in the Netherlands to block the file-sharing website The Pirate Bay [website] or else pay a fine of USD $12,750 per day. Rechtbank-Gravenhage [official website, in Dutch], a Dutch district court, issued its ruling on Thursday in favor of Stichting Brien [official website, in Dutch], an anti-piracy organization composed of artists, authors and producers against a group of Dutch ISPs. The court's ruling effectively blocks direct access to The Pirate Bay for Dutch consumers. Online piracy advocates say, however, that users can evade the ban on The Pirate Bay by accessing the site indirectly. The Dutch ISPs plan to appeal the ruling [AP report], saying that they do not have a duty to act as censors.
Internet piracy has been a contentious issue both in the US and abroad recently. In March, JURIST guest columnist Tony Niescier suggested [JURIST op-ed] that the US resolve Internet-related disputes through an online forum. In February, the European Commission [official website] asked the European Court of Justice [official website] to evaluate an anti-piracy agreement [JURIST report] to ease concerns that the agreement may lead to censorship. In January, the US House of Representatives [official website] postponed hearings [JURIST report] on the Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA) after a highly constested provision of the bill was removed.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|
| For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...
|
|
|