This Day at Law

Alaska challenged listing of polar bear as endangered species

2013-05-22T04:00:00Z

On May 22, 2008, Alaskan officials announced that they would file a legal challenge to the Department of the Interior (DOI)'s decision to list the polar bear as threatened on the endangered species list. Governor Sarah Palin claimed that the listing was unnecessary and would have a negative economic impact on development in Alaska. The polar bear was put on the list after two years of research by multiple agencies within the DOI that culminated in a classification that required protections of the animal and its habitat, but permitted continued developments of oil and gas. In June 2011, a federal judge upheld the DOI's classification.

Learn more about endangered species from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

DOD audit found Iraq contracts failed to meet anti-fraud guidelines

Bahrain court upheld 2 death sentences for police killings

President Adams pardoned participants of Pennsylvania rebellion

2013-05-21T04:00:00Z

On May 21, 1800, US President John Adams issued a pardon to the participants in the 1799 Fries' Rebellion that occurred in southeastern Pennsylvania. The rebellion, motivated by citizen disdain over a federal property tax, resulted in protestors descending on Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in March 1799 to free individuals that had been arrested for attacking federal tax collectors. Though the federal government initially charged 45 rebels with treason, only rebellion leader John Fries and three other individuals were found guilty of treason and sentenced to death. President Adams' May 21 pardon extended to all individuals involved with the rebellion, except for Fries. President Adams later pardoned Fries on May 23, the date of his execution.

Flag of the United States

Learn more about rebellions from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Obama created commission to investigate BP Gulf oil spill

Spain judge reinstated charges against US soldiers for journalist death in Iraq

Supreme Court decided landmark gay rights case

2013-05-20T04:00:00Z

On May 20, 1996, the US Supreme Court held unconstitutional Amendment 2 to Colorado's state constitution because it violated the Equal Protection Clause. Amendment 2 prohibited the state and municipal governments from enacting, adopting or enforcing anti-discriminatory legislation that protected persons of same-sex orientation. The Court analyzed the amendment under rational basis review and found that the legislative classification bore no rational relation to a legitimate state interest. According to Justice Anthony Kennedy, "a law declaring that in general it shall be more difficult for one group of citizens to seek aid from the government is itself a denial of equal protection of the laws in the most literal sense."

Learn more about gay rights from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

House passed Senate version of credit card holders' 'bill of rights'

Russia president Medvedev called for legal reforms, stronger judiciary

Maryland ordered rail company to disclose its role in Holocaust

2013-05-19T04:00:00Z

On May 19, 2011, Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley signed a bill requiring French railroad company SNCF to disclose information regarding its participation in the Jewish Holocaust. SNCF was accused of transporting 76,000 Jews and other prisoners from Paris to Germany from 1942 to 1944. In October 2006, the company faced 1,200 claims from families seeking damages for its role in the Holocaust. In June 2006, SNCF was ordered by a French trial court to pay a Jewish family for its participation in crimes against humanity, but on March, 27, 2007, a French appeals court overturned that conviction.

Flag of Maryland

Learn more about the Holocaust from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Gov. Perry signed law requiring sonogram before abortion

Amnesty International reported 840 Egypt revolution deaths

Vermont became first state to outlaw fracking

2013-05-18T04:00:00Z

On May 18, 2012, Vermont became the first US state to ban hydraulic fracking when Governor Peter Shumlin signed Bill H. 464 into law. Hydraulic fracking is a method used by many major oil companies to extract natural gas and obtain shale oil and gas by using an extremely pressurized mixture of water, sand and undisclosed chemicals to break through rock. The Green Mountain State passed this measure preemptively, without evidence of a reserve of oil or gas in the state. New York extended its moratorium on fracking, while former North Carolina Governor Beverly Perdue vetoed a measure lifting a statewide ban on fracking in July 2012, and NJ Governor Chris Christie vetoed a bill that would have banned the practice in the state in June 2011.

Read an overview of Fracking in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

Supreme Court remanded Ashcroft immunity case

Afghan Guantanamo detainee died in apparent suicide

Massachusetts became first state to legalize same-sex marriage

2013-05-17T04:00:00Z

On May 17, 2004, Massachusetts became the first state in the union to legalize same-sex marriage. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health that the state's constitution prohibited a ban on same-sex marriage passed in November 2003. Attempts to reverse the legalization of same-sex marriage in the state through ballot initiatives, amendments and legislation were unsuccessful, despite support from Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

Seal of Massachusetts

Read an overview of Same-Sex Marriage in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

Federal appeals court upheld Minnesota campaign finance law

Rwanda genocide tribunal convicted ex-military chief Bizimungu

Texas group sued to block border fence construction

2013-05-16T04:00:00Z

On May 16, 2008, the Texas Border Coalition, a group of Texas-based business owners and officials, filed a class action lawsuit to enjoin the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from constructing a fence on the US-Mexico border. The group claimed that approval of the fence's construction violated the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which required the government to hold fair negotiations with landowners when seeking access to property along the border. The case was dismissed in May 2009 due to lack of standing. The issue of construction of a continuous border fence or virtual fence with cameras and radar between the US and Mexico continues to be debated.

Read an overview of US Immigration Law in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

Supreme Court allowed warrantless search when exigency is created by police

ICC prosecutor sought Gaddafi arrest warrant for crimes against humanity

Anti-illegal immigration ordinance was challenged in court

2013-05-15T04:00:00Z

On May 15, 2007, two advocacy groups requested a temporary restraining order from the US District Court of the Northern District of Texas in an effort to block an anti-illegal immigration city ordinance passed in Farmers Branch, Texas. The ordinance was scheduled to go into effect that same day after being approved by voters the week prior. The ordinance required apartment renters to demonstrate proof of US residency and penalized landlords who rented to undocumented immigrants with a $500 fine. The ordinance was originally scheduled to go into effect in January 2007, but was delayed due to a previous challenge. In March 2012, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the district court's ruling that the ordinance was unconstitutional.

Read an overview of US Immigration Law in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

CIA director defended congressional interrogation information

Switzerland voters rejected ban on assisted suicide for foreigners

New York representatives introduced Equality Act

2013-05-14T04:00:00Z

On May 14, 1974, former US Representatives Bella Abzug and Ed Koch of New York introduced the Equality Act in the US House of Representatives. The Equality Act was a proposal to expand the coverage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. The bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, but it died in committee and never became enacted. Lawmakers continued to propose similar legislation, only to have the bills fail in the House of Representatives, including the April 2011 Employment Non-Discrimination Act, proposed by former Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts.

Learn more about legal issues surrounding sexual orientation from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Speaker Pelosi claimed CIA misled Congress on interrogation techniques

Belarus presidential candidate sentenced to 5 years in prison for inciting riots

Kazakhstan approved constitutional amendment to increase presidential powers

2013-05-13T04:00:00Z

On May 13, 2010, the upper house of the Kazakhstan Parliament passed a constitutional amendment granting significant additional powers to President Nursultan Nazarbayev. The lower house of Parliament had approved the amendment the day before. The amendment would have extended significant additional benefits to Nazarbayev, including being named "leader of the nation," granting immunity from investigation or prosecution for life and assuring that his property and holdings could not be confiscated for any reason. Facing intense scrutiny both in Kazakhstan and abroad, on June 4, 2010, Nazurbayev declined to sign the amendment into law.

Emblem of Kazakhstan

Learn more about Kazakhstan from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Georgia governor signed anti-illegal immigration bill

Germany parliament approved late-term abortion restrictions

France passed internet piracy bill

2013-05-12T04:00:00Z

On May 12, 2006, the French National Assembly first approved an amended version of a controversial bill created to prevent Internet piracy. The bill proposed that Internet access be cut off for users who repeatedly illegally downloaded copyrighted material after they had received two warnings, and that a third offense be punished by a one year ban from the Internet. Supporters of the bill alleged that it protected copyrighted material, while those opposed to it claimed that the bill did not properly balance the rights of Internet users and copyright holders. The bill was subsequently defeated and its constitutionality challenged before it was approved on October 22, 2009.

Learn more about Internet piracy from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Immigration restrictions passed Arizona legislature

Pakistan court restrained president from political activities

Oklahoma Senate approved bill requring pre-abortion questionnaire

2013-05-11T04:00:00Z

On May 11, 2010, the Oklahoma Senate voted by a 32-11 margin to approve a bill (HB 3284) requiring women seeking an abortion to complete a questionnaire before the procedure. The Statistical Abortion Bill Act probes into such areas as marital status, reasons for seeking an abortion and whether the woman's pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. A state court judge struck down an identical bill in February 2010, deeming it to be in violation of the state constitution's requirement that a law cover one subject. Former Democratic Governor Brad Henry vetoed the bill on May 24, 2010, for being "personally intrusive," but the House of Representatives and Senate overrode the veto on May 26, 2010.

Read an overview of Reproductive Rights in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

US hedge fund manager convicted of insider trading

Canada man pleaded guilty in first terrorism fundraising case

DOJ filed discrimination suit against Arizona sheriff

2013-05-10T04:00:00Z

On May 10, 2012, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a discrimination suit in the US District Court for the District of Arizona against the Sheriff's Office of Arizona's Maricopa County and Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The claim alleged that Sheriff Arpaio and his office unlawfully and systematically discriminated against Latino persons through law enforcement on the basis of race, color or national origin. The DOJ sought injunctive relief to counter future discriminatory actions by implementing anti-discriminatory policies.

Read an overview of US Immigration Law in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

Accused bombed sued Poland over secret CIA prison

Egypt court convicted ex-tourism minister of corruption

Microsoft appealed EU antitrust fine

2013-05-09T04:00:00Z

On May 9, 2008, Microsoft appealed a massive EU antitrust fine for failing to comply with a 2004 ruling. The ruling found that Microsoft had abused its monopoly power and required the company to share technical information with competitors and lower its prices. In October 2007, Microsoft announced it was dropping an appeal to the ruling and would comply. The record fine, €899 million (USD $1.3 billion), was issued in February 2008 due to a finding that the company had not adequately complied with the 2004 ruling. An EU court upheld the fines in June 2012.

Flag of the European Union

Learn more about antitrust law from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Federal appeals court urged to block Oklahoma Islamic law ban

Australia lodged whaling complaint against Japan in ICJ

North Carolina voters approved gay marriage ban

2013-05-08T04:00:00Z

On May 8, 2012, North Carolina voters passed a constitutional amendment that banned same-sex marriage, bringing the number of states with constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage to thirty-one. Since then, Maine, Maryland and Washington have voted to legalize same-sex marriage. In April 2013, the Rhode Island legislature voted to legalize same-sex marriage in that state.

Read an overview of Same-Sex Marriage in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

Gates claimed some Guantanamo detainees posed release threat

Vietnam began prosecution of anti-Communist activists for 'terrorism'