 |
|

Legal news from Thursday, March 22, 2007 |
 |
|


UK police arrest three suspected in 2005 London transit bombings
Leslie Schulman on March 22, 2007 5:04 PM ET

[JURIST] British police arrested three men [press release] on Thursday in connection with the London transit bombings [JURIST news archive; BBC News timeline] on July 7, 2005 that killed 56 people, including the bombers, and injured more than 700 others. Two suspects were detained at Manchester Airport while catching a plane to Pakistan, and the third was arrested at his home. According to police, the detainees were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 [text] on suspicion of committing, instigating, or preparing acts of terrorism and will be held and interrogated.
These were the first significant arrests in the bombings case. No one has ever been charged. Al Qaeda officially claimed responsibility for the attacks on September 1, 2005, in a videotape which aired on al Jazeera TV. In 2005, some bombing suspects detained in Greece alleged they were tortured, prompting the British Intelligence and Security Committee and the Greek Ministry of Justice [JURIST reports] to launch investigations. BBC News has more.


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

|

Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenas Rove, Miers, DOJ aides in US Attorney probe
Joshua Pantesco on March 22, 2007 2:47 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] on Wednesday authorized subpoenas for former White House Counsel Harriet Miers [official profile], Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove [official profile], and several DOJ aides to testify and provide documents to the committee regarding the recent US Attorney firing scandal [JURIST news archive]. Last week, the Committee subpoenaed five other DOJ aides [JURIST report] to testify. Democratic committee members roundly rejected President Bush's offer [PDF text; JURIST report] to allow the committees to question Miers, Rove, and Sampson during a private questioning session, not under oath. On Wednesday, a House Judiciary Committee panel subpoenaed Rove, Miers, and several aides [JURIST report] to testify in a concurrent investigation. Read the statement [text] delivered by chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) [official website] to the Committee on Thursday. AP has more.
Both committees want Miers and Rove to testify on allegations that the firings of several US Attorneys by US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales [official profile] were politically motivated [JURIST report]. The accusations have led Congress to consider restricting the Attorney General's power [JURIST report] to appoint interim US Attorneys. Despite Bush's assertions that Gonzales has "got support with me," reports have surfaced that the White House is considering potential replacements for Gonzales [JURIST report].
Last week, reports emerged that Rove originally suggested firing all 93 US Attorneys in January 2005, according to an e-mail conversation [JURIST report; e-mail text] released by the DOJ. The e-mails appeared to contradict the White House's prior assertion that the idea to comprehensively dismiss US Attorneys first came from Miers [JURIST report].


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

|

Child Online Protection Act held unconstitutional
Joshua Pantesco on March 22, 2007 2:08 PM ET

[JURIST] A federal judge on Thursday granted a permanent injunction [decision, PDF] against enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) [text], a federal law that imposes civil and criminal penalties on website operators for making sexually explicit materials available to minors over the Internet and require adult websites to verify viewer age with a credit card number or any other reasonable method of age verification. Senior District Judge Lowell A. Reed, Jr. [American Inns of Court profile] of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania [official website] ruled: After a trial on the merits, for the reasons that follow, notwithstanding the compelling interest of Congress in protecting children from sexually explicit material on the Web, I conclude today that COPA facially violates the First and Fifth Amendment rights of the plaintiffs because: (1) at least some of the plaintiffs have standing; (2) COPA is not narrowly tailored to Congress compelling interest; (3) defendant has failed to meet his burden of showing that COPA is the least restrictive, most effective alternative in achieving the compelling interest; and (4) COPA is vague and overbroad. As a result, I will issue a permanent injunction against the enforcement of COPA. The US Supreme Court in 2004 upheld a temporary injunction against the enforcement of COPA in Ashcroft v. ACLU [text], holding that COPA would likely violate the First Amendment, and remanded the case back to the District Court. Judge Reed presided over a four-week trial on the merits which concluded in November 2006.
COPA was enacted in 1998 after similar provisions contained in the Communications Decency Act (CDA) [text] were struck down in Reno v. ACLU [text] as unconstitutional because it was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest and because less restrictive alternatives were available. Last year, Google fought a Justice Department subpoena [JURIST report; subpoena text, PDF] seeking to force the search engine giant to hand over a large amount of user data, including one week's worth of query searches and up to 1 million web addresses as part of a federal effort to rewrite COPA. AP has more. Read the ACLU press release here.


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

|

France newspaper cleared of defamation for Muhammad cartoons republication
James M Yoch Jr on March 22, 2007 1:27 PM ET

[JURIST] A French court Thursday cleared Charlie-Hebdo magazine and director Philippe Val of defamation in last year's republication of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad [JURIST news archive] originally published in a Danish newspaper in September 2005. The court ruled that the defendants did not intend to purposely offend Muslims and so did not slander or defame anyone. Had Val been found responsible in the defamation action, he could have faced six months' imprisonment and over $28,000 in fines because the French legal system allows criminal sanctions in certain civil defamation actions [Taylor Wessig backgrounder, PDF]. The Paris Mosque [mosque website, in French] and the Union of Islamic Organizations of France (UIOF) [advocacy website, in French], the Muslim organizations that filed the lawsuit, had originally sought to prevent the cartoons' publication [JURIST report], but a French court refused to hear the lawsuit on procedural grounds. The UIOF said it plans to appeal, but the Mosque of Paris will probably abandon the suit.
French Interior Minister and presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy [official profile] prepared a statement defending the right of the newspaper to publish the cartoons that the defense read during opening arguments [JURIST report]. State attorneys also called for the case to be dismissed. AP has more.


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

|

Argentina ex-president to face trial for alleged 'dirty war' rights abuses
James M Yoch Jr on March 22, 2007 12:57 PM ET

[JURIST] Argentine federal Judge Alberto Suarez Araujo ruled Wednesday that former president Reynaldo Bignone [Wikipedia profile] will face criminal charges for his alleged role in disappearances and human rights abuses during Argentina's 1976-83 "Dirty War" [GlobalSecurity backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. According Araujo's spokesperson, Bignone faces prosecution for the illegal arrest, torture and killing of dissidents at secret detention centers in Buenos Aires. Argentine authorities arrested [JURIST report] Bignone, 78, earlier this month pursuant to a statute that allows detention of suspects over the age of 70. Bignone denies any role in the disappearances or the alleged abuses. Araujo also ordered former army chief, Santiago Omar Riveros, to face prosecution.
Bignone was the last of Argentina's 1976-83 military dictators before democracy was re-established in 1983. Nearly 13,000 people are officially reported as missing during the military crackdown, although human rights groups say the toll is closer to 30,000 victims. In January, Argentine judges issued two separate warrants [JURIST report] for the arrest of former president Isabel Peron [BBC profile], currently living in exile in Spain, for her alleged role in dirty war disappearances before she left office in 1976. AP has more.


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

|

Plea deal results in record fine for tanker company that polluted 5 US cities
Joe Shaulis on March 22, 2007 12:48 PM ET

[JURIST] One of the world's largest oil tanker companies was sentenced to pay a $27.8 million criminal fine for intentionally polluting the waters near five cities, the US Justice Department and the US Attorney's Office in Boston announced [press release] Wednesday. Overseas Shipholding Group Inc. (OSG) [corporate profile] pleaded guilty Wednesday in the US District Court for Massachusetts [official website], admitting that a dozen tankers leaked waste during a nearly five-year period that ended last March. The cities affected were Portland, ME, Wilmington, NC, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco. OSG was charged with 12 offenses including conspiracy, false statements, obstruction of justice, and violations of the Clean Water Act [text; EPA summary] and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 [text; EPA summary].
OSG agreed to pay $9.2 million toward marine environmental projects nationwide, bringing the total penalty to $37 million - the largest resulting from a plea agreement for deliberate vessel pollution, according to the Justice Department. US District Judge Reginald C. Lindsay [official profile] also approved whistleblower payments to 12 OSG workers pursuant to the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships [text]. Each will receive $437,500. OSG is also subject to an independently monitored environmental compliance program during its three-year probation. Reuters has more. The Boston Globe has local coverage.
This report was prepared in partnership with the Pittsburgh Journal of Environmental and Public Health Law.


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

|

Bush campaigner's conviction in New Hampshire phone jamming case overturned
James M Yoch Jr on March 22, 2007 12:19 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit [official website] on Wednesday overturned [opinion text] the conviction of James Tobin [SourceWatch profile], President Bush's 2004 campaign chairman for New England. Tobin was convicted for his involvement in jamming phone lines to block Democratic voting drives [JURIST report] during the 2002 Senate election in New Hampshire, which was won by Republican candidate Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) [official website] by less than five percentage points. The First Circuit remanded the case to the district court because no intent to harass was alleged, proved, or disputed by the parties. Tobin, who was sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment [JURIST report] last year, remains free after the reversal. AP has more.
Tobin maintained his innocence throughout the district court trial, claiming to have no knowledge of the 800 hang-up phone calls that were placed to interfere with Democratic get-out-the-vote campaigns. In addition to the prison sentence, he was also fined $10,000 and given two years probation. In separate proceedings, Allen Raymond, former president of Republican consulting group GOP Marketplace, received a five month sentence, and Chuck McGee, the former executive director of the New Hampshire Republican Party was sentenced to seven months in prison and $2,000 in fines [JURIST reports]. McGee admitted that he had paid a Virginia telemarketing company more than $15,000 in a scheme to jam Democratic Party phone lines with computer-generated calls. In November, Shaun Hansen, former owner of the telemarketing firm Mylo Enterprises Inc., pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to two federal counts of conspiracy to commit interstate telephone harassment. A civil lawsuit brought by the New Hampshire Democratic Party against the New Hampshire Republican State Committee was settled [JURIST reports] late last year for $135,000.


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

|

Federal judges slow to report travel expenses as required: court watchdog
Joshua Pantesco on March 22, 2007 8:11 AM ET

[JURIST] The Community Rights Counsel (CRC) [advocacy website] said Wednesday that the new Judicial Conference Policy on Judges' Attendance at Privately Funded Educational Programs [PDF text; backgrounder] has not yet produced any public disclosures of travel expenses on judicial websites. According to the Judicial Conference: The Judicial Conference adopted a private seminars disclosure reporting policy that requires educational program providers and judges to disclose certain information relevant to judges' attendance at privately-funded educational programs.
The disclosure policy takes effect on January 1, 2007. This means that any organization covered by the policy that issues an invitation on or after January 1, 2007 (for a program commencing after that date), to a federal judge to attend an educational program as a speaker, panelist, or attendee and offers to pay for or reimburse that judge, in excess of $305, must disclose financial and programmatic information. The policy requires disclosure within 30 days, but CRC, a judicial ethics watchdog group, conducted a review [press release] and found that "80 days after the January 1, 2007 effective date of the new policy, not a single junket has been reported." The CRC criticized the Administrative Office for the US Courts for "applying the policy in a way that seems designed to delay the reporting of information as long as possible" by determining that the policy only applies to invitations issued on or after January 1, 2007.
The Judicial Conference of the United States [backgrounder] is the policy-making body of the federal court system and is led by Chief Justice John Roberts. A court spokesperson said Wednesday that effective implementation of the new system could take some time. AP has more.


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

|

Forbes Russia editor found liable for defamation
Joshua Pantesco on March 22, 2007 7:33 AM ET

[JURIST] A Moscow court on Wednesday found Maksim V. Kashulinsky, publisher of the Russian edition of Forbes magazine, guilty of defamation for saying publicly that the subject of an upcoming piece had filed a lawsuit to make changes to the story, and that Kashulinsky thought the lawsuit was a violation of media freedom and amounted to censorship. The subject of the piece was the Inteko company, which is owned by the wife of the mayor of Moscow, Yelena Baturina [Wikipedia profile], who is worth nearly $1.4 billion. Intenko had sued Forbes Russia to change a caption of a cover story on Baturina that had read, "Yelena Baturina: I am guaranteed protection," which Inteko argued implied that Baturina's husband was the reason for the success of Inteko. Forbes Russia agreed to change the caption to read, "I am guaranteed protection as an investor," but Inteko maintained the suit, seeking damages of 106,500 rubles, about $4,089, representing one ruble for each copy of the magazine sold.
Kashulinsky's predecessor editor-in-chief, Paul Klebnikov, was murdered in 2004 while in the process of investigating corrupt business practices in Russia. The two Chechens accused of murdering him are standing a new trial after the Russia Supreme Court reversed their acquittal [JURIST report] in November. Kashulinsky said after the verdict was read that the decision will not affect editorial policy at Forbes Russia [RIA Novosti report]. The New York Times has more.


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

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