The government's evidence in this case shows only the size and effect of one class of advertising: traditional commercial advertising. ... But the government cannot point to evidence that its fear of harm to public television that would come from allowing stations to air public issue and political advertisements is "real, not merely conjectural," much less that the portions of the statute which ban such political and public issue advertisements "alleviate those harms in a direct and material way."

This ruling is also of particular importance in the wake of the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission [Cornell LII backgrounder] decision issued by the Supreme Court [official website] in January 2010. In that case, the Court eased restrictions on political campaign spending by corporations. Shortly after Citizens United, in March 2010, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [official website] unanimously ruled [JURIST report] that limiting contributions from individuals to independent political advocacy organizations was unconstitutional. These decisions have led to significant increases in political message spending.

Last month Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] urged all EU member states to reconsider involvement in the CIA extraordinary rendition program. In 2010 the American Civil Liberties Union [advocacy website] appealed to the US Supreme Court [JURIST report] a lawsuit challenging the extraordinary rendition program. The suit alleged unlawful rendition and torture of terror suspects, but had been dismissed by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit based on a claim by the US Department of Justice [official website] that discovery in the case would violate the state secrets privilege [JURIST news archive]. Also in 2010, WikiLeaks [advocacy website] released a document showing that the Bush administration strongly urged Germany to not prosecute CIA officials [JURIST report] involved in the arrest and torture of a German citizen. The documents revealed that US officials were to carefully consider how prosecution of the officials would affect relations with the US, although US officials maintained they did not threaten Germany. Earlier that year the US Supreme Court denied certiorari [JURIST report] to a Canadian citizen seeking to overturn a lower court ruling that denied him the right to sue the US government under the Torture Victim Protection Act [text].

This means (i) the cessation of drone attacks inside the territorial borders of Pakistan, (ii) no hot pursuit or boots on Pakistani territory and (iii) the activity of foreign private security contractors must be transparent and subject to Pakistani law. lt needs to be realized that drone attacks are counter productive, cause loss of valuable lives and property, radicalize the local population, create support for terrorists and fuel anti American sentiments.

The debate about drone strikes in Pakistan is highly contentious. Some argue for the importance of Pakistani consent and others focus on the dangerous precedent such strikes may set [JURIST op-eds]. As recently as last month, the Pakistani government called for the US to halt the unmanned strikes [JURIST report]. Earlier in March, a rights group brought a lawsuit against the UK for its role in the drone strikes [JURIST report]. Last July, Pakistani civilians sought the arrest of an ex-CIA official [JURIST report] in relation to the use of drone strikes. The US Department of State's [official website] legal advisor has been an avid defender of the strikes since March 2010 [JURIST report].

This legislation is consistent with my strong track record of supporting common sense measures to protect the health of women and safeguard our most vulnerable population—the unborn. ... Knowing that abortions become riskier the later they are performed in pregnancy, it only makes sense to prohibit these procedures past twenty weeks.

Arizona follows many other states that have recently passed laws restricting abortion. In March, Utah passed a law [JURIST report] requiring a woman seeking an abortion to wait 72 hours prior to obtaining the procedure. Also last month, the Idaho State Senate approved a bill [JURIST report] requiring a woman who is seeking an abortion to first receive an ultrasound. Also, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell [official website] signed a similar ultrasound bill into law [JURIST report]. Earlier in March, the Georgia House of Representatives passed a ban on abortions after five months into a pregnancy [JURIST report]. In February, the US District Court for the Western District of Texas [official website] ruled [JURIST report] that Texas can enforce a state law requiring women to receive a sonogram before obtaining an abortion. In July, the North Carolina state legislature overrode a governor's veto [JURIST report] to pass a law requiring a 24-hour waiting period for a woman seeking an abortion.

Egypt has been in the process of restructuring its government since protests led to the Mubarak's resignation last year. Earlier this week, an Egyptian court ordered suspension of a constitutional panel [JURIST report], which consisted of about 100 people, charged with writing the country's new constitution. The panel was suspended pursuant to a challenge by Egyptian lawyers that its members were not chosen constitutionally. Egypt is also in the process of trying Mubarak for assisting in the killing of protesters last year. His trial ended last month, and a judge has set the verdict date [JURIST reports] for June 2.

Trials in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official website] relating to the Serbian genocide continue to develop. Radomir Vukovic's 31-year sentence was upheld in January [JURIST report]. The trial of former commander of the Bosnian Serb Army Ratko Mladic [ICTY case materials; JURIST news archive] continues with him pleading not guilty earlier this month [JURIST report]. Last July, the District Court in The Hague ruled that the Netherlands is liable for the death of three Bosniak men during the Srebrenica massacre [JURIST report].

Abortion is a controversial issue among predominantly Roman Catholic Latin-American countries. In March, the Supreme Court of Argentina [official website, in Spanish] ruled [JURIST report] that rape victims cannot be prosecuted for seeking abortions. In September, Mexico's Supreme Court [official website, in Spanish] upheld [JURIST report] an amendment that stated life begins at conception thereby banning abortion. In 2008, Uruguay's president vetoed a law that was passed [JURIST reports] by the legislature decriminalizing abortion.

Ivaschenko is one of several members of Tymoshenko's administration to be sentenced for abuse of power. Former interior minister Yuriy Lutsenko and former ecology minister Georgy Filipchuk were both sentenced to four and three years of imprisonment for abuse of office and corruption charges, respectively. Tymoshenko herself was sentenced [JURIST report] in October to seven years in prison on similar charges. Her prosecution has been highly criticized internationally as politically motivated. In March, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] urged [JURIST report] the Ukrainian government to ensure that Tymoshenko is receiving adequate medical treatment. In December, the European Commission expressed its concern [Kyiv Post report] that the Ukrainian hearings in prison do not conform with the European Convention on Human Rights. Additionally, the EU has called [JURIST report] Tymoshenko's conviction "a violation of human rights and an abuse of the judiciary designed to silence Ukraine's leading opposition politician."