Privacy concerns remain a significant as websites grow in complexity, and the data about individual users they possess becomes more interconnected. In August German data privacy authorities reopened [JURIST report] an investigation into facial recognition software used by Facebook that automatically recognizes facial features in pictures. In February the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] dismissed [JURIST] a suit brought by EPIC, asking the FTC to block Google's [corporate website] proposed privacy policy changes [text]. Some commentators have noted that privacy regulations can be transnational [JURIST op-ed] and have effect beyond their immediate jurisdictional boundaries.

Tobacco labeling and advertising have been litigated for years. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in August that tobacco companies do not need to print graphic warnings [JURIST report] of the dangers of smoking on cigarette packages. In a 2-1 decision, the DC Circuit struck down a Food and Drug Administration regulation that requires tobacco companies to display graphic images such as a man smoking a cigarette through a hole in his throat. Also in August, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire revoked class action status [JURIST Report] in a lawsuit challenging the labeling of "light" cigarettes. In July the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit struck down [JURIST report] a New York City Department of Health regulation requiring stores to display graphic anti-tobacco ads where tobacco products are sold.

A number of Second Amendment guns control cases have been percolating in the courts throughout the country. In July the state of Florida stated that it would appeal the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida [official website] ruling that struck down [order, PDF] a Florida law barring doctors from discussing the dangers of gun ownership with patients. In March the US District Court for the District of Maryland [official website] ruled [JURIST report] that a Maryland law which limited individuals' rights to obtaining a permit by requiring a "good and substantial reason" was unconstitutional. In June 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled in McDonald v. Chicago [opinion; JURIST report] that the Second Amendment applies to states and municipalities as well as the federal government, thereby overturning Chicago's ban on handguns and raising considerable uncertainty about what amount of regulations of firearms was permissible.

Litigation involving smartphone technologies have become more common throughout the globe. The most significant example is the battle between Samsung and Apple [corporate websites]. Earlier this month, a judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of California [official website] ruled that Apple and Samsung may each pursue additional patent infringement claims against the other, allowing each company to add devices brought to market after the original lawsuit was filed in February. In October the Dutch Rechtbank's-Gravenhage [official website] court ruled that Samsung did not infringe [JURIST report] on an Apple software patent. In the same month, a UK court also ruled that Samsung did not infringe [JURIST report] on an Apple design patent. In the same time frame Apple appealed [JURIST report] a Tokyo District Court ruling which dismissed the company's claim that Samsung had infringed on its patents. At the beginning of October, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit [official website] reversed an injunction [JURIST report] against Samsung that prevented it from selling its Galaxy Nexus product. Earlier in August, Apple won a $1.05 billion judgment [JURIST report] in the Northern District of California against Samsung involving other patent infringements.

The practice of conversion therapy has come under scrutiny lately. Last month California became the first state to enact a law banning conversion therapy [JURIST report]. That bill [SB 1172; Senate backgrounder, PDF] was approved by the California State Assembly at the end of August and by the California Senate [JURIST reports] in May. Supporters of the bill asserted that the underlying reason for the legislation is that homosexuality is not a disease and that therapies to reverse homosexuality were found to have detrimental effects on minors' physical and mental health, leading to suicides and substance abuse. Conversely, groups such as the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) [advocacy website] voiced their opposition, arguing that most of the facts relied on in the bill are generalizations and loose assertions. According to some experts, California's efforts to pass the ban on sexual orientation therapy have highlighted a need for better gender identity standards [JURIST op-ed].

Of the women who have been deployed since September 11, 2001, 85 percent reported serving in a combat zone or in an area where they drew imminent danger pay or hostile fire pay, and nearly half reported being involved in combat operations. Many of those women have served in combat with distinction. But they have been deprived of the training, opportunities, and recognition they deserve because, under the combat exclusion policy, they cannot "officially" be assigned to ground combat units.

This is the second suit [JURIST report] brought this year by female service members challenging the combat exclusion policy. Last year a US military panel, the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, recommended [JURIST report] that women be allowed to serve on the front lines of combat. Their report said that integration of women into combat forces would have no ill effects and recommended a "time-phased" approach to the implementation of new combat policies that would create additional career options for women that include "direct ground combat." These recent suits to allow women into combat roles come on the heels of another civil rights push in military policy-last year's repeal of the controversial "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy (DADT) [10 USC § 654; JURIST news archive]. Last year Australia became the fourth nation [JURIST report] which permitted women to serve in combat roles.

Arizona is currently facing multiple lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of recently passed abortion restrictions. The district court injunction was granted [JURIST report] in October. In September, a federal court issued an emergency injunction against an Arizona law that prohibits abortions after 20 weeks into a pregnancy except for in medical emergencies, which was challenged [JURIST reports] by the Center for Reproductive Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona [advocacy websites] in July. The law restricting funding to abortion clinics was signed by Governor Jan Brewer in May [Reuters report], while the law banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy was signed in April [JURIST report].

Immigration law [JURIST backgrounder] has became a hot button issue over the past few years as many states have passed laws giving state and local officials more power to crack down on illegal immigration. Earlier this month, a judge for the US District Court for the District of South Carolina [official website] upheld [JURIST report] part of South Carolina's controversial immigration law [SB 20, materials] that permits law enforcement officials to detain motorists on the side of the road for a "reasonable amount of time" while the officer checks the driver's immigration status. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] in September denied a request for a new injunction against a controversial provision of Arizona's immigration law [SB 1070, PDF] which requires law enforcement officials to check the immigration status of persons they stop or arrest if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the US illegally. In August the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit [official website] again heard arguments [JURIST report] on two anti-illegal immigrant laws enacted in 2006 by the city of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, which deny permits to businesses that employ illegal immigrants and fine landlords who extend housing to them.

Colombia has drawn attention from UN rights bodies several times recently. In October UN experts urged [JURIST report] Colombia to reconsider this constitutional reform. In August UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people James Anaya [official website] also called upon [JURIST report] the government of Colombia to advance its negotiations with indigenous authorities in northern Cauca regarding the military presence in the area, as well as other pressing issues. Last December the representative to Colombia for the OHCHR called for a peaceful solution [JURIST report] to the country's ongoing armed conflict involving hostages held by paramilitary rebels.

Tension between Egypt's judiciary and the administration has persisted despite the overthrow of former president Hosni Mubarak last year. Morsi agreed to meet with the judges [JURIST report] earlier this week to discuss the decree. In August a lawyer in Egypt filed an appeal challenging a declaration by Morsi granting himself complete legislative and executive power [JURIST reports]. In July, a few days after he was sworn in, Morsi issued a decree [JURIST reports] calling the Egyptian parliament back into session, despite a previous ruling by the country's Supreme Constitutional Court [official website] dissolving parliament after finding that one-third of its members were elected illegally. The court suspended Morsi's decree two days later, after which Morsi vowed that he would respect the ruling [JURIST reports]. Days before its dissolution, the Egyptian parliament elected a new constitutional council after lawmakers finally reached an agreement [JURIST reports] on the political composition of the council. In April the country's Administrative Court temporarily suspended [JURIST report] the work of the Egyptian Constituent Assembly after ruling in favor of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the formation of the panel.

The case [SCOTUSblog backgrounder] concerns a former employee of US Airways, James McCutchen, who was injured in a car accident. McCutchen, as an employee, had a self-funded health plan that ended up paying out approximately $66,000 for his injuries. Through insurance payouts and a settlement from the negligent driver, even with a hefty attorney's fee levied against him, McCutchen ended up approximately $66,000 ahead. US Airways then demanded reimbursement of its health plan's payout, since McCutchen's medical care was covered by other insurance options, based on language in the plan itself. The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in defiance of several other circuits held [opinion] that "appropriate equitable relief" did not include revoking the payment to McCutchen.

As many as 140 million women and girls worldwide have undergone some form of FGM, which is defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) [official website] as "all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or injury to the female genital organs for nonmedical reasons." In February the UN released its annual report on trends in FGM, revealing that approximately 2,000 African communities have renounced the practice [JURIST report] since last year. In 2010 Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] called on the government of Iraqi Kurdistan [JURIST report] to outlaw FGM and to develop a comprehensive legislative plan to reduce the practice in the region. In 2009 Uganda unanimously outlawed FGM [JURIST report] and imposed harsh penalties on anyone who conducts the procedure.