JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE ARCHIVEDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.
Listen to Paper Chase!


Legal news from Saturday, December 22, 2012




Federal judge approves final class settlement order in BP oil spill case
Keith Herting on December 22, 2012 12:55 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana [official website] on Friday gave final approval [order, PDF] to a settlement between British Petroleum (BP) [corporate website] and those who experienced economic and property loss stemming from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. The $7.8 billion settlement marks the final point in settling monetary remuneration between BP and those who suffered economic and property damages from the oil spill, but the settlement does not resolve claims by those who allege the oil spill has caused them illness. Judge Carl Barbier's ruling suggests that his ruling is both "favorable to claimants" while still putting an reasonable cap on the amount for which BP will be liable. The widely anticipated ruling was welcomed by lawyers on both sides of the claims. BP welcomed the news [press release] calling it an "important step forward for BP in meeting its commitment to economic and environmental restoration efforts in the Gulf."

Friday's ruling has been another development in a long series of legal battles that have arisen from the Deepwater Horizon Crisis. Last month BP executives pleaded not guilty [JURIST report] to criminal charges levied against them for their role in the spill. That same day the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] announced that BP would be indefinitely suspended [press release] from bidding on government contracts, saying the company's "lack of business integrity" has disqualified them from consideration. Also in November US Attorney General Eric Holder announced that BP had agreed to pay a record $4.5 billion in penalties and to plead guilty [JURIST report] to felony misconduct for its role in the devastation caused by the oil spill. It has been argued that this settlement was a step in the right direction [JURIST op-ed] for compensating those affected by the oil spill.




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


Federal appeals court blocks California sexual orientation therapy law
Keith Herting on December 22, 2012 12:07 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] granted an injunction [text, PDF] on Friday to temporarily block enforcement of a California law banning mental health providers from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) with minors. The injunction will prevent the law, SB 1172 [text], which was slated to take effect on January 1, 2013, from being enforced until the constitutionality of the law can be determined by the appeals court. The plaintiffs claim that the law violates their right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment [text]. The plaintiffs were represented by the Christian legal group Liberty Counsel (LC) [advocacy website], who were quick to declare the injunction a victory claiming [press release] that the law is "politically motivated to interfere with counselors and clients." The court has indicated it will "fast-track" a review of the law which will allow for a speedier ruling on its constitutionality.

Earlier in the month a federal district court refused to block the law [JURIST report] claiming a challenge of the constitutionality was "not likely to prevail." A separate challenge to SB 1172 resulted in a temporary injunction [JURIST report] by a different judge in the same court earlier in the week. That challenge, brought by the Pacific Justice institute (PJI), resulted in a temporary injunction which would have allowed the plaintiffs in that case to continue SOCE after the law goes into effect. PJI filed its lawsuit challenging the bill just days after it was signed [JURIST reports] into law by California Governor Jerry Brown [official website] in October. SB 1172 was approved by the California State Assembly [JURIST report] in August and the California Senate [JURIST report] in May. Supporters of the bill, including groups such as Equality California [advocacy website] and the American Psychoanalytic Association [advocacy website] assert the reason for legislation is that homosexuality is not and should not be treated as a disease, and efforts to reverse homosexuality have proven to be detrimental to minors.




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


Regional rights court strikes down Costa Rica in vitro fertilization ban
Samuel Franklin on December 22, 2012 11:38 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Inter-American Court of Human Rights [official website, in Spanish] ruled [judgment, PDF, in Spanish; press release, PDF, in Spanish] Thursday that Costa Rica's ban on in vitro fertilization (IVF) violates the rights to privacy, liberty, personal integrity and to form a family, as recognized under international law. The challenge was filed [JURIST report] in July 2011 on behalf of [text] 50 Costa Rican couples who have had to seek IVF procedures in other countries as a result of the ban. In 2000 the Supreme Court of Justice of Costa Rica [official website] banned IVF, declaring the practice unconstitutional because it violates an embryo's right to life. Since then, maintaining the ban has received support [The Australian report] from conservative groups and the Catholic church in Costa Rica. Their campaigns focused on the disposal of fertilized eggs common in IVF procedures, portraying the practice as tantamount to murder.

IVF is a type of fertility treatment for couples who have had difficulty conceiving children. Through IVF, a woman's eggs are removed and fertilized outside the body. Successfully fertilized embryos are then implanted into the woman for gestation. Costa Rica was the only Western nation that banned the practice. Although the nation is known for a progressive human rights and civil liberties record, the government usually holds to the Catholic Church's edicts on many social issues. In August 2010 the Supreme Court of Costa Rica ruled 5-2 to disallow a nationwide referendum [JURIST report] on whether to recognize same-sex civil unions [JURIST backgrounder]. The referendum was to be on the ballot during the December 2010 municipal elections after qualifying for the ballot through a petition.




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


Federal judge dismisses filibuster lawsuit
Samuel Franklin on December 22, 2012 10:09 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] on Friday dismissed [opinion, PDF] a lawsuit claiming that Senate filibusters are an unconstitutional denial of majority rule. The lawsuit was brought by a non-profit organization known as Common Cause [advocacy website] as well as four members of the US House of Representatives and individuals who allege they would have benefited from the DREAM Act [JURIST news archive]. Despite acknowledging the filibuster rule as an important and controversial issue, the court ultimately denied further proceedings because of the plaintiffs' lack of standing and the court's overall apprehension toward interfering with separation of powers. While the US Constitution does not contain any language regarding the proper length of, or method for, the Senate to debate proposed legislation, it does grant each House the power to determine the rules of its proceedings, something "beyond the jurisdiction of this court," stated US District Judge Emmet Sullivan.

The Senate filibuster rule has been a long-standing tradition on Capitol Hill, but has not been without its criticism, particularly in the previous few years over alleged misuse and abuse. In May Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) on the Senate floor called [Huffington Post report] for a change to the rule, referencing bills for which both parties have shown overwhelming support, but are in danger of expiration due to unjustified filibuster delay. Currently, Senate rules dictate that 60 votes are needed to end debate on a bill while a simple majority would be required to pass it. The most infamous of filibusters was during debate over the Civil Rights Act of 1957 [JURIST report] in which former Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) spoke [biography] on the Senate floor in protest of the bill for 24 hours and 18 minutes without pause, a record that stands to this day.




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

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


LATEST OP-ED

The War on Terror and the Need for Muslim Support
DOMESTIC
Faisal Kutty
Valparaiso University Law School

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

SYNDICATION

Add Paper Chase legal news to your RSS reader or personalized portal:
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Add to My AOL

E-MAIL

Subscribe to Paper Chase by e-mail. JURIST offers a free once-a-day digest [sample]. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.


R|mail e-mails individual Paper Chase posts through the day. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.

PUBLICATION

Join top US law schools, federal appeals courts, law firms and legal organizations by publishing Paper Chase legal news on your public website or intranet.

JURIST offers a news ticker and preformatted headline boxes updated in real time. Get the code.

Feedroll provides free Paper Chase news boxes with headlines or digests precisely tailored to your website's look and feel, with content updated every 15 minutes. Customize and get the code.

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org