[JURIST] A two-day referendum on a proposed new Serbian constitution [DOC; text] which includes a controversial preamble asserting Serbia's ongoing claim to Kosovo got underway on Saturday, but only a small number of voters turned out in its early stages. The Serbian Election Commission [official website, in Serbian] announced [press release] Saturday evening that 17.81% of eligible voters had cast their ballots by 8 PM local time. The support of over 50% of Serbia's 6.63 million registered voters is required to make the draft law. Srdjan Djuric, Director of the Serbian government's Office of Media Relations, said in a statement [text]that "tomorrow we have to show that we love our country and to complete the job that has been started.... Serbia will not allow to be the only state without a constitution [sic]."

The draft constitution was approved by parliament earlier this month [JURIST report]. Serbian leaders have called it the "last line of defense of Kosovo," but EU and US diplomats have warned [JURIST report] that references to the province in the draft charter will not impact ongoing United Nations discussions over the region's future status.

[JURIST] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] Friday withdrew a three-year-old lawsuit [complaint, PDF] challenging Section 215 [ACLU backgrounder] of the Patriot Act [PDF; JURIST news archive]. Congressional amendment of the Act [JURIST report] in March 2006 was cited as the reason for dropping the suit. Before amendment, Section 215 provided that federal agents, empowered by an order from a secret court, can access personal information such as medical or library records without probable cause. Changes to Section 215 allow persons faced with federal demands for information to seek legal counsel and bring a challenge in court.

Originally filed in July 2003 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan [official site], the suit was the first challenge to Section 215. Judge Denise Page Hood ruled [Detroit News report] a few weeks ago that the plaintiffs were harmed by the Act and the suit could go forward. AP has more.

[JURIST] The US DC Circuit Court of Appeals [official website] ruled Friday that Iraqi-American Mohammed Munaf had to be given ten days to appeal his case to the US Supreme Court and then the high court had to be accorded time to rule on that before the US military can legally transfer him to Iraqi custody and likely execution. In early October, an Iraqi judge sentenced Munaf to death for his alleged role [JURIST report] in the kidnapping of three Romanian journalists in 2005. Munaf, who is married to a Romanian woman, was born in Iraq but became a US citizen in 2000.

On October 13 lawyers for Munaf filed an emergency motion [PDF text; declaration, PDF] in federal court to prevent the military from transferring him [JURIST report] to Iraqi authorities. Munaf claims his confession was coerced, authorities did not confront him with the evidence brought against him, and he was not allowed to present his own exculpatory evidence. Ordinarily, these allegations, if proven, would be sufficient for American courts to intervene on Munaf's behalf. US District Judge Royce Lamberth [official profile] ruled October 19 that the federal courts had no power to intervene [opinion] in the case because Munaf was in Coalition, not American, custody. Jonathan Hafertz, counsel for Munaf, told JURIST Hotline afterwards that:

The decision is unprecedented and unjustified, flouting more than a half-century of Supreme Court precedent establishing that US citizens detained overseas have a constitutional right to challenge their detention by the United States as well as their transfer to a foreign sovereign....More is at stake than the life of an American citizen. The decision threatens to create a blank check for executive imprisonment wherever the United States claims it is holding an American citizen under the guise of a multinational operation.

[JURIST] Former White House official David Safavian [Wikipedia profile], convicted in June of lying and obstructing justice [JURIST report] in connection with the Jack Abramoff [JURIST news archive] lobbying scandal, received an 18-month prison sentence [US DOJ press release] Friday. In January, Abramoff pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to fraud and conspiracy charges stemming from a 2000 casino purchase and was sentenced to nearly six years in prison [JURIST report]. Safavian, who was helping Abramoff with the deal, lied to federal investigators about his relationship with the former GOP lobbyist.

The judge Friday denied the government's request for a tougher prison sentence because Safavian did not give or receive bribes, enrich himself or give contracts away. Democrats, however, have accused Republicans of fostering a "culture of corruption" [Wikipedia backgrounder], and it is unclear how these recent ethics scandals will affect Republicans in the November 7 elections. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] A Florida appeals court overturned [ruling, PDF] a lower court ruling [JURIST report] Friday and granted state election officials permission to post polling area signs telling voters that ballots cast for Mark Foley would count as votes for his Republican replacement candidate. Foley's name appears on the ballot because it was too late to take his name off when he resigned last month after sending inappropriate text messages [JURIST report] to congressional aides.

The Florida Democratic Party [political party website] initiated the suit, saying the signs mentioning Joe Negron [campaign website] would amount to political ads, not permitted within 100 feet of polling places. The appeals court Friday said the signs would have to include the names of the Democrat and independent candidates as well. The Democrats do not plan to appeal. Reuters has more.

[JURIST] A federal judge Friday rejected a claim by US Air Force Academy [official website] graduates that a military chaplain illegally forced Christianity on them [JURIST report]. US District Judge James A. Parker dismissed [opinion, PDF] the case because the cadets could not give specific examples of when cadets were harmed and because they no longer attend the academy. He wrote:

Plaintiffs never allege a personal link or connection to any alleged future Establishment Clause violations. Without that personal link or connection to future misconduct, plaintiffs have simply not shown that they will suffer an injury in fact that is both concrete and particularized and actual or imminent.

[JURIST] President George W. Bush insisted Friday that the US does not torture prisoners when asked [White House press release] whether he agreed with a comment by Vice President Dick Cheney that a "dunk in the water" is a "no-brainer" when it comes to interrogating terror suspects. Scott Hennon of Fargo North Dakota-based WDAY Radio asked Cheney in an interview [transcript; recorded audio] on Tuesday, "Would you agree a dunk in water is a no-brainer if it can save lives?" Cheney replied:

It's a no-brainer for me, but for a while there, I was criticized as being the Vice President "for torture." We don't torture. That's not what we're involved in. We live up to our obligations in international treaties that we're party to and so forth. But the fact is, you can have a fairly robust interrogation program without torture, and we need to be able to do that.

the administration does believe in legal questioning techniques of known killers whose questioning can, in fact, be used to save American lives. The Vice President says he was talking in general terms about a questioning program that is legal to save American lives, and he was not referring to water boarding.

I was being interviewed by a talk show host. I don't talk about techniques and I wouldn't. I have said that the interrogation program for a select number of detainees is very important. It has been I think one of the most valuable intelligence programs we have. And I believe it has allowed us to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States. I did not talk about specific techniques involved --

Q So it was not about water boarding, even though he asked you about dunking in the water?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I didn't say anything about water boarding. Those were all his comments. He didn't even use that phrase.

Q He said dunking in the water.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I didn't say anything, he did.

[JURIST] A federal judge issued [ACLU press release] a temporary restraining order Friday designed to alleviate crowded conditions in California's Los Angeles County jail system [LASD website]. The order from US District Judge Dean D. Pregerson came in response to a suit by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] seeking to remedy "almost unspeakable conditions" in county jails, where up to 60 men were housed in holding cells designed for 20 and prisoners had to take turns standing because there was no room to sit or sleep. Pregerson, who toured the Men's Central Jail in Los Angeles in May, wrote: "...inmates, particularly pre-trial detainees who are imbued with presumption of innocence, deserve better than to be housed in a system which has defaulted to the lowest permissible standard of care."

Pregerson directed that immediate improvements be made to facilities, that inmates could not be held in the Inmate Reception Center for more than 24 hours, and that the county could not hold more than 20 people in a holding cell "without first exhausting every other means." His order also requires inmates be provided with cells that are clean and sanitary and include access to a toilet and water for drinking and washing. A hearing on the restraining order is scheduled for December 11. The Los Angeles Times has local coverage.

California's prison system has recently faced heavy criticism for overcrowding and other systemic inadequacies. In May 2005, US District Judge Thelton E. Henderson threatened to take over the state prison health care system [JURIST report], citing the "terrible" medical care that prisoners received. In February 2006 the head of the state prison system resigned [JURIST report] after a two year reform effort. In early October, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger issued an emergency proclamation [text] to relieve prison overcrowding by allowing inmates to be transferred to privately-run facilities in other states [JURIST report]. The $8.2 billion California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation [official website] houses more than 171,000 youth and adult convicts.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] agreed to hear four cases Friday, including one where the Court will decide whether the parents of an autistic child must hire a lawyer or whether they can represent themselves in an accommodation lawsuit against a school district. In Winkelman v. Parma City School District, the boy's parents are appealing a Sixth Circuit decision [PDF text] that they must have a lawyer in their lawsuit under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act [text], despite the parents arguments that they cannot afford legal counsel. AP has more.

The Court also granted certiorari in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp, where the court will rule on a patent dispute concerning the overseas distribution of a Microsoft Windows program utilizing speech-coding technology of AT&T [corporate website], valued at more than $1 billion. The Court is considering Microsoft's appeal of a 2005 decision [PDF] from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. AP has more.

In Scott v. Harris, an appeal from an Eleventh Circuit decision [PDF text], the Court will decide whether a police officer violated a fleeing suspect's constitutional rights when he bumped his police car into the suspect's car to end a high speed chase. AP has more.

In EC Term of Years Trust v. United States, the Court will decide if an individual taxpayer is entitled to a $3 million refund of wrongly collected taxes, even though the deadline for appealing to the Internal Revenue Service [official website] had expired. Read Friday's full Order List [PDF].