[JURIST] The European Commission (EC) [official website] fined [EC press release] computer chip maker Intel Corp. [corporate website] €1.06 billion Wednesday for violating European Union antitrust laws and ordered Intel to cease engaging in the anti-competitive behaviors. The EC announced that Intel violated the laws [Article 82 backgrounder] by giving computer companies rebates to purchase nearly all of their supplies from Intel and paying companies not to use products made by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) [corporate website], Intel's main competitor. The EC has indicated that the fine must be paid within three months and that the 542-page decision will be published soon [EC press release]. AMD president and CEO Dirk Meyer hailed the ruling [AMD press release] as "an important step toward establishing a truly competitive market." Intel announced [Intel press release] that it would appeal the decision but would comply with it in the meantime.

Intel has faced numerous antitrust suits [JURIST news archive]. Last June, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) [official website] opened a probe against Intel [JURIST report] for anti-competitive behavior. Last year, the Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) [official website] fined Intel nearly $26 million [JURIST report] after a KFTC probe [JURIST report] found that the company had engaged in anti-competitive practices. The state of New York opened an antitrust probe [JURIST report] into Intel's actions and AMD also filed [JURIST report] a civil suit [complaint, PDF; Intel response] against the company last year.

[JURIST] In the first hearing [materials] on whether Bush administration interrogation techniques constituted torture, one witness before the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts [official website] on Wednesday called memos on enhanced interrogation methods "an ethical train wreck" and another witness claimed that the methods were not effective. Georgetown law professor David Luban [academic profile] testified [testimony]:

Unfortunately, the interrogation memos fall far short of professional standards of candid advice and independent judgment. They involve a selective and in places deeply eccentric reading of the law. The memos cherry-pick sources of law that back their conclusions, and leave out sources of law that do not. They read as if they were reverse engineered to reach a pre-determined outcome: approval of waterboarding and the other CIA techniques.

[JURIST] Judge Gladys Kessler of the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] has released an opinion [text] to accompany last week's order [text, PDF; JURIST report] granting the habeas corpus petition of Yemeni Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainee Alla Ali Bin Ali Ahmed. In the heavily redacted opinion, released Monday, Kessler adopted a "substantially supported" standard for reviewing the habeas petitions filed by detainees, which makes no reference to the "enemy combatant" [JURIST news archive] classification upon which the previous standard was based. Kessler wrote that the government failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Ahmed was "part of, or substantially supported, Taliban or al-Qaida forces or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners." According to the opinion, the government failed to prove that Ahmed participated in fighting, received military training, or substantially supported al Qaeda or the Taliban. At least four witnesses on whose statements the government based its case against Ahmed were speculative, vague, or not credible [Washington Post report]. Ahmed denied he ever engaged in terrorist activities.

Ahmed was picked up [DOD materials, PDF] in an al Qaeda safe house in 2002 in Pakistan. The government had argued that Ahmed's detention was justified under the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) [text]. Kessler noted that the Obama administration relies on the AUMF rather than Article II of the US Constitution as a source of authority for detaining terrorism suspects but no longer uses the term "enemy combatant" as a criterion for ordering such detentions. Last month, another district judge for the District of Columbia adopted [JURIST report] the "substantially supported" standard for authorizing and reviewing detention of terrorism suspects at Guantanamo proposed by the Department of Justice [official website].

[JURIST] US President Barack Obama [official website] has decided to seek a delay of the release of photographs depicting the allegedly abusive treatment of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan, reversing an earlier decision, White House officials said Wednesday. Last month, the Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] agreed to release [JURIST report] at least 44 photographs pursuant to a court order. The photos were scheduled to be released May 28. Obama reversed that decision after meeting last week with White house lawyers, citing concerns over retribution against US troops serving overseas. Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) also wrote to Obama last week to urge him to fight the release of the photos [press release]. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said during a Wednesday press briefing [transcript]:

The President does not believe that the strongest case regarding the release of these photos was presented to the court, and that was a case based on his concern of what the release of these would do to our national security. He believes that the release of these photos could pose a threat to the men and women we have in harm's way in Iraq and Afghanistan, and doesn't believe that we made - doesn't believe that the government made the strongest case possible to the court and asked the legal team to go make that case.

Now, let me be clear: I am concerned about how the release of these photos would be - would impact on the safety of our troops. I have made it very clear to all who are within the chain of command, however, of the United States Armed Forces that the abuse of detainees in our custody is prohibited and will not be tolerated. ... Any abuse of detainees is unacceptable. It is against our values. It endangers our security. It will not be tolerated.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] held [opinion, PDF] Monday that tort claims against a federally licensed gun maker and gun dealer stemming from a 1999 California shooting must be dismissed under a federal statute enacted in 2005. The court concluded that Congress intended the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) [text, PDF], which protects federally licensed gun makers and sellers from civil liability for injuries criminals inflict when using their products against others, to preempt general tort-law claims. The PLCAA requires dismissal of pending civil suits seeking damages for injuries a third party caused using a firearm. The plaintiffs argued the statute is unconstitutional, but the Ninth Circuit determined that the statute, though retroactive, is constitutional because it is in accord with separation-of-powers doctrine, withstands rational-basis review, and does not deprive the plaintiffs of procedural due process. The court also ruled that the PLCAA does not apply to plaintiffs' claims against defendant manufacturer China North [AP report] because China North does not have a federal firearms license. The plaintiffs have not decided if they will appeal the Ninth Circuit's decision.

In 1999, white supremacist Buford Furrow [NYT backgrounder], who illegally possessed at least seven guns, shot and injured five people at a Jewish community center in Granada Hills, California. Later that day, Furrow shot and killed postal worker Joseph Ilteo. The shooting victims and Ileto's widow sued gun makers, marketers, distributors, sellers and importers, including Glock Inc. [corporate website] and a Seattle gun dealer, "under California common law tort statutes for foreseeably and proximately causing injury, emotional distress, and death through knowing, intentional, reckless, and negligent conduct." Plaintiffs claimed the defendants intentionally made, marketed, distributed and sold "more firearms than the legitimate market demands in order to take advantage of re-sales to distributors that they know or should know will, in turn, sell to illegal buyers." The district court dismissed the suit in 2002 for failure to state a claim under state law, but the Ninth Circuit ruled that the plaintiffs stated cognizable state-law negligence claims regarding the guns Furrow actually used in the shootings. Three years later, after Congress passed the PLCAA, the district court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit.

[JURIST] Secular Turkish judges have warned that amendments to the Turkish constitution [text; materials] proposed by the country's ruling Islamic Justice and Development Party (AKP) [party website, in Turkish] that would include restructuring the Constitutional Court [official website, in Turkish] are going too far to promote an Islamic agenda. Head of the Council of State [official website, in Turkish], the country's high administrative court, Mustafa Birden said Saturday that an amendment that threatened secularism would violate both international and domestic law [Hurriyet report]. Birden called for a consensus among political parties [Today's Zaman report] on constitutional amendments. On Monday, chief judge of the Court of Appeals [official website, in Turkish] Hasan Gerceker, said that conditions are not right for constitutional amendments [Gercek Gundem report, in Turkish] at the moment and that the judiciary must maintain its independence and should not be chosen by political parties.

The judges' recent comments are the latest examples of tension between pro-secularists and the AKP. In July, the Constitutional Court narrowly rejected a bid to ban [JURIST reports] the AKP, which was accused of ignoring the secular principles of the country's constitution. Six of the 11 judges on the court favored dissolving the party, but seven would have been required to successfully pass the ban. The court agreed that the party violated the constitution's secular principles, but only ordered that the state treasury reduce the party's funding by half in response. Constitutional reforms are currently an issue as Turkey seeks European Union (EU) [official website] accession [criteria materials]. The EU has told Turkey to amend its constitution that was written under military rule and limits freedom of expression and freedom of religion.

[JURIST] The New York State Assembly [official website] on Tuesday passed a bill [text; materials] that would allow same-sex marriages [JURIST news archive] to be performed in the state. The legislation, which was introduced last month [press release; JURIST report] by New York Governor David Paterson [official profile], passed by a vote of 89-52. The assembly passed a similar measure [JURIST report] in 2007, and five members who voted against that bill voted in favor [NYT report] of Tuesday's bill. Gay rights group the Empire State Pride Agenda [advocacy website] applauded [press release] Tuesday's vote, and called on the New York State Senate [official website] to pass the legislation as well. The bill now goes before the Senate, where its future is uncertain. The 2007 measure was defeated in the Senate. The proposed legislation is strongly opposed by conservative groups such as New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms and the Alliance Defense Fund [advocacy websites], as well as the Conservative Party of New York State [party website], which has threatened to end support for any politician who votes for the bill.

If the Senate were to approve the bill, New York would become the sixth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Last week, Maine became the fifth state to allow same-sex marriage [JURIST report] when Governor John Baldacci [official website] signed a same-sex marriage bill into law. Last month, Vermont became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage through a vote of the legislature, joining Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Iowa [JURIST reports] as the other states that allow same-sex marriage. A same-sex marriage bill is currently before the New Hampshire [JURIST report] governor.

[JURIST] A former high-value US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) [official website] detainee died in a Libyan prison Tuesday. Ali Mohamed Abdelaziz al Fakhiri, also known as Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [Newsweek backgrounder], apparently committed suicide [Reuters report] in his cell at al Saleem prison. The Bush administration cited al-Libi as the source of the flawed pre-Iraq war intelligence that Saddam Hussein provided weapons training to members of al Qaeda [JURIST news archives]. Al-Libi later claimed he fabricated the allegations because he was abused by Egyptian interrogators. Al-Libi was also a commander of the Khalden training camp in Afghanistan [JURIST news archive] and was named as a potential witness for the defense in US terrorism trials. However, since he was formerly part of the US secret extraordinary rendition program [JURIST new archive], it was never officially confirmed he was in Libyan custody. Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] has called for an investigation [HRW press release] into al-Libi's death.

The circumstances of al-Libi's death renew concerns [Reuters report] about US links to nations with questionable human rights records, especially concerning the custody of high-value detainees facing terrorism charges. Libya has a mixed human rights record in recent years. Under international pressure, they released two political prisoners [JURIST report] convicted of a plan to overthrow the government of Libya. Relations between Libya and the US are improving, though the State Department recently criticised [JURIST report] Libya for its continued detention of political prisoners [JURIST report] in its 2008 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices [DOS materials]. In 2008, the US and Libya reached an agreement to settle all pending lawsuits [JURIST report] brought by US terror victims against Libya. In 2004, the US lifted the remaining sanctions [JURIST report] against Libya as a reward for its agreement to dismantle its weapons programs. At the same time, Libya faced international criticism [JURIST report] for its treatment of six foreign medics [JURIST news archive] accused infecting hospital patients with HIV in 2007.