Liberty University's challenge is one of the latest developments concerning the controversial PPACA. In June the US Department of Treasury (DOT) [official website] announced that it will delay enforcing [JURIST report] the PPACA employer mandate for businesses with 50 or more full-time employees until 2015. A week before, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit [official website] ruled that Hobby Lobby [corporate website] may challenge the mandate to provide employees with coverage for contraceptives under the PPACA. The court found [JURIST report] that the company sufficiently established a likelihood of success in showing that their rights are substantially burdened by the contraceptive-coverage requirement and that they have established an irreparable harm. The Supreme Court ruled last year that the "individual mandate" provision [text] of the act, which requires every person, with some exceptions for religious and other reasons, to purchase some form of health insurance by January 1, 2014, did not violate the Constitution [JURIST report]. The PPACA was signed into law [JURIST report] by President Barack Obama in March of 2010. It was passed by the US House of Representatives and approved [JURIST reports] by the US Senate months earlier.

Egypt has faced political unrest since the Egyptian Revolution [JURIST backgrounder] began over two years ago. The Egyptian Supreme Constitutional Court announced in February that it had rejected parts of the draft election law [JURIST report] that will govern the country's parliamentary elections. Earlier that month the Supreme Constitutional Court postponed ruling [JURIST report] on whether the legislative constitutional assembly that recently drafted a new charter was legitimate. The judges claimed a crowd of Islamists outside the courthouse of had intimidated the judges and blocked the entrance to the courthouse. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay in late January voiced concern [JURIST report] over the growing violence and rising death toll in Egypt stemming from ongoing protests throughout the country. Earlier in January recently disposed Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi declared a state of emergency in an attempt to quell growing unrest and violent political protests in cities a day after nationwide unrest compounded following an Egyptian court ruling handing down 21 death sentences [JURIST reports] for a 2012 soccer riot that resulted in 74 deaths and thousands of injuries.

In BG Group PLC v. Republic of Argentina [transcript, PDF; JURIST report] the court must decide whether a court or the arbitrator determines if a precondition to arbitration has been satisfied in disputes involving a multi-staged dispute resolution process. The case involves a Bilateral Investment Treaty between the UK and Argentina, signed into law in 1990. The treaty provides that a dispute between an investor and a host state will be resolved in the host state's courts, and, if no timely resolution is reached, then the case proceeds to arbitration. British investor BG Group PLC invoked the arbitration clause against Argentina without first filing in Argentine court. The panel found that it had jurisdiction and awarded damages to BG Group. The district court denied Argentina's motion to vacate the award, but the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the award [opinion]. BG Group argues that it is for the arbitrator, not the court, to determine whether the precondition to arbitration has been satisfied. Counsel for BG Group asked the court "to resolve this case narrowly by reaffirming that an arbitrator rather than a court presumptively resolves a dispute over a precondition to arbitration." Counsel for the US government argued as amicus curiae in support of vacating the lower court's judgment and remanding. Counsel for Argentina argued, "This is a contract formation case and it's a case that is decided properly by the court below whether you apply first options or whether you apply treaty principles."

Mohammed faces charges of of conspiracy, murder in violation of the law of war, attacking civilians, attacking civilian objects, intentionally causing serious bodily injury, destruction of property in violation of the law of war, hijacking aircraft and terrorism. He could face the death penalty if convicted. Last month US Attorney General Eric Holder [official website] stated [JURIST report] at an unrelated press conference that the slow pace of the trial of Mohammed would have been avoided had he been tried before a federal civilian court. In January the Department of Defense (DOD) [official website] announced that it would not withdraw charges of conspiracy [JURIST report] against five accused plotters, after the chief Guantanamo prosecutor asked the DOD's appointee to dismiss the prosecution charge in order to avoid uncertainty that could delay the case. Four years ago, Holder announced a plan [JURIST report] to try the defendants in federal court in lower Manhattan. However, in 2011 Holder referred the cases to the DOD after Congress imposed a series of restrictions [JURIST report] barring the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the US.

Australian banks are not alone in being accused of charging unconscionable fees to customers. In May a US federal judge reinstated [JURIST report] a USD $203 million penalty against Wells Fargo [corporate website] in a class action suit alleging that the bank affirmatively misled customers and then charged excessive overdraft fees. Rather than processing purchases in a chronological order, as is the common practice, the bank processed its customers' purchases from largest to smallest. In July 2012 JPMorgan Chase [corporate website; JURIST news archive] agreed [JURIST report] to a $100 million settlement in a case alleging that the company increased monthly minimum payments for credit card holders from 2 percent to 5 percent in 2008 and 2009 to profit from higher fees.

In February UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] criticized [JURIST report] Egypt for drafting a similar anti-protest law for failure to adequately protect freedom of assembly as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [text] and two international rights treaties ratified by Egypt. Last year the Spanish government faced criticism [Telegraph report] after introducing legislation that aimed to reduce public demonstrations by restricting the use of social networking. The measures were criticized by many, with some people comparing the measures to those of Gen. Francisco Franco's regime.

The Syrian Civil War has been ongoing since 2011 when opposition groups first began protesting Assad's regime. Last month JURIST Guest Columnist Leslie Esbrook opined [JURIST op-ed] that an international war crimes prosecution would not end the ongoing conflict in Syria. In September the UN called for [JURIST report] an end to weapons being supplied to both Syria's government and rebels. Rights groups accused [JURIST report] the Syrian government of responsibility for August 21 chemical weapon attacks, which allegedly involved the use of sarin nerve gas. Syria's main opposition group in August urged the UN [JURIST report] to probe numerous massacres they say were committed during Ramadan by forces loyal to Assad. JURIST Guest Columnist Paul Juzdan argues [JURIST op-ed] that even if the UN Security Council decides to intervene in Syria, unilateral intervention would violate international law; a dilemma which, as discussed by JURIST Guest Columnist Patricio Galella, exposes the weakness [JURIST op-ed] of of the UN system of collective security.