I don't think there's any doubt [that the law invites racial profiling] because ... if you're a legal resident, you still have to carry papers. [H]ow is a law enforcement official supposed to know? So, again, we have to try to balance the very legitimate concerns that Americans - not just people in Arizona, but across the country - have about safe and secure borders, about trying to have comprehensive immigration reform, with a law that I think does what a state doesn't have the authority to do, try to impose their own immigration law that is really the province of the federal government.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (R) [official website] on Friday signed into law a bill [HB 2162 materials; JURIST <a href="http://
jurist.org/paperchase/2010/05/arizona-governor-signs-amendments-to-immigration-law.php">report] designed to clarify the new immigration law. The original bill, signed into law [JURIST report] in April, makes it a crime to be an undocumented immigrant and requires police to question anyone whose immigration status appears suspect. Immigrants unable to verify their legal status could be arrested and jailed for six months and fined $2,500. The new bill includes strengthening restrictions against using race or ethnicity as the basis for questioning by police and specifies that law enforcement officers can only question a suspect's immigration status if the suspect has already been stopped while enforcing another law. Both bills are set to take effect on July 29. Earlier this week, two lawsuits were filed [JURIST report] challenging the new law. President Barack Obama has also criticized the law [JURIST report], calling for federal immigration reform. Senators Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and Charles Schumer (D-NY) [official websites] unveiled [JURIST report] a proposal for comprehensive immigration reform in March. The plan entails improving border security, creating a system through which temporary workers would be admitted, introducing biometric identification cards, and instituting a process to legalize illegal immigrants [JURIST news archive] currently residing within the US. It would be the first attempt at immigration reform since the failed [JURIST report] Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill [S 1639 materials] in 2007. At that time, detractors called the bill too lenient on illegal immigrants and said that by granting legal status to illegal aliens, the US was granting "amnesty."

The Belgian House of Representatives [official website, in French] on Thursday voted 136-0 to approve [JURIST report] a bill that would ban the burqa and other full face veils in public. The proposed legislation [materials, in French] applies to areas "accessible to the public" or areas meant for "public use or to provide public services." Violators could face a penalty of up to seven days in jail or a fine of 15 to 25 euros. The measure must now go before the Senate [official website, in French]. France, which has Europe's largest Muslim population, has also been pressing for a ban on the burqa. Last month, the French Council of State advised the French government against a complete ban [JURIST report] on full Islamic veils because it risks violating the French Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights [texts]. Also last month, lawmakers in Quebec introduced a bill [Star report] that would ban women from wearing full face veils from public services, which garnered support from members of the Muslim Canadian Congress [official website] who argue that the law would not violate human rights [JURIST comment] and would promote the ideals of a free and democratic society.

Separate charges were filed against two different groups of suspected pirates. Charges [indictment, PDF] were filed against a group of six alleged pirates who were captured by the USS Nicholas [Navy press release] in late March, and separate charges [indictment, PDF] were filed against the other five who were captured by the USS Ashland [Thaindian News report] in April. Early in April, Kenyan Foreign Minister Minister Moses Wetangula said that Kenya will no longer accept Somalian pirate cases [JURIST report] to be tried in its courts. In January, the International Chamber of Commerce International Maritime Bureau (IMB) [official website] reported that 2009 marked the worst year for maritime piracy [JURIST report] in six years. The information indicated that the total reported incidents of piracy reached 406, surpassing 400 for the first time since 2003.

The request for a judicial probe in Argentina was a reaction to the Spanish Supreme Court's decision to charge [JURIST report] National Court judge Baltasar Garzon [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] with abuse of power for his investigation of war crimes during the Franco regime. The indictment has sparked international outrage [NYT op-ed] and massive protests [JURIST report] in Spain. Last month, Garzon appealed the indictment [JURIST report], alleging that the it is politically motivated, compromises judicial independence, and seeks to impose a specific interpretation of a 1977 law granting amnesty for political crimes committed under Franco.