This Day at Law

UN Security Council condemned sexual violence as war tactic

2013-06-19T04:00:00Z

On June 19, 2008, the UN Security Council condemned the use of sexual violence against civilians as a war tactic through a unanimously adopted resolution. The vote came as the result of an ongoing UN conversation on women, peace and security around the world. Since the adoption of the resolution, sexual violence continues to be a problem in conflicts around the world. In March 2013, during an annual session of the UN women's commission, members urged nations to adopt legislation banning gendered and sexual violence. Additionally, sexual violence has been identified as a topic of concern around the world, in nations as diverse as Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Egypt and Syria, among others.

Flag of the UN

Learn more about sexual violence from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

US House voted to impeach federal judge for sexual harassment, obstruction

Greece PM proposed constitutional referendum

President Adams signed first of the Alien and Sedition Acts into law

2013-06-18T04:00:00Z

On June 18, 1798, US President John Adams signed the Naturalization Act of 1798, the first of four pieces of legislation collectively referred to as the Alien and Sedition Acts, into law. The act repealed in part the Naturalization Act of 1795 by increasing the period of time required for immigrants to reside in the US from five years to 14 years. The 1798 act maintained the requirement that immigrants had to be white to receive citizenship and could not be citizens of a nation at war with the US. In 1802, Congress repealed the Naturalization Act of 1798 due to public backlash against the Alien and Sedition Acts.

US President John Adams

Learn more about citizenship from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

North Carolina passed bill requiring use of E-Verify

Bahrain government lifted ban on opposition party

Congress passed Reclamation Act

2013-06-17T04:00:00Z

On June 17, 1902, the US Congress passed [PDF] the Reclamation Act of 1902. Prior to the passage of the act, people in the western US had difficulty obtaining sufficient water supplies due to arid conditions and the overconsumption of limited resources. The Reclamation Act addressed this issue by requiring that money obtained through the sale of public lands in the western US be used to fund irrigation projects and reclaim arid lands. Congress delegated the authority to examine, survey and construct irrigation projects to the Secretary of the Interior, and created the Bureau of Reclamation to manage the projects. To date, the bureau has been responsible for the construction of over 600 dams and reservoirs in the western US.

Learn more about legal issues surrounding environment from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Judge approved $11 million Virginia Tech settlement

Japan executed three in campaign to reduce violent crime

Sri Lanka government ceased investigations into possible human rights abuses

2013-06-16T04:00:00Z

On June 16, 2009, the Sri Lankan government ceased investigations into possible human rights abuses that allegedly occurred during the 25 year civil war between the government and a separatist militant organization, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The investigations began in 2007, and with less than half of its cases resolved, the mandate expired with no renewal granted, leading commentators to suspect the resurgance of the LTTE. Since June 2009, the Sri Lankan government has been urged by various groups to look into potential human rights abuses that occurred during the war, and the government has itself launched independent probes into the matter.

Flag of Sri Lanka

Learn more about Sri Lanka from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Supreme Court ruled individuals may challenge federal law for violating states' rights

Indonesia cleric was sentenced to 15 years in prison on terror conviction

Japan courts dismissed compensation claims of 'war orphans'

2013-06-15T04:00:00Z

On June 15, 2007, Japanese district courts dismissed the claims of Japanese plaintiffs abandoned as children in China during World War II. The courts ruled that the current government was not required to compensate the plaintiffs because it was not obligated to aid in the war orphans' reestablishment and assimilation back in Japan. Because of their relocation, most of the plaintiffs relied on government aid. On July 9, 2007, in exchange for abandoning all compensation claims, the plaintiffs accepted an aid proposal from the Japanese government. On December 5, 2007, Japanese Prime Minster Yasuo Fukuda apologized to the war orphans for the government's failure to support them.

Flag of Japan

Learn more about Japan from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Alabama governor signed bill banning abortions after 20 weeks

Kenya selected five appointees to serve on first Supreme Court

US mayors passed resolution opposing Arizona immigration law

2013-06-14T04:00:00Z

On June 14, 2010, the US Conference of Mayors passed a resolution opposing SB 1070, the controversial Arizona immigration law, and supporting federal immigration reform. The organization, which represents thousands of cities larger than 30,000 people, passed the resolution at the annual meeting of the organization in Oklahoma City with a voice vote of at least two-thirds of the over 200 mayors in attendance. The resolution called the Arizona law unconstitutional and was submitted by four mayors, including the mayor of Phoenix. The Arizona law was challenged by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and partially overturned by the US Supreme Court in Arizona v. US.

Read an overview of US Immigration Law in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

State Department called human trafficking a 'serious problem' in US

ICRC called Gaza blockade violation of international law

Rhode Island Senate passed 'homeless bill of rights'

2013-06-13T04:00:00Z

On June 13, 2012, the Rhode Island Senate passed legislation aimed at protecting the rights of homeless persons. This "homeless bill of rights" included the rights to vote and to move freely in public spaces and on public transportation, among others. Governor Lincoln Chaffee signed the bill, which was the first bill of its kind to pass at the state level in the US, into law on June 27, 2012. In May 2013, California and Illinois considered similar bills, and legislators in other states have also considered homeless bills of rights.

Learn more about legal issues surrounding homelessness from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Florida officials partially closed coastline to commercial fishing following oil spill

Israel PM appointed former Supreme Court judge to head flotilla raid probe

Falkland Islands announced they would hold a referendum on sovereignty

2013-06-12T04:00:00Z

On June 12, 2012, the government of the Falkland Islands announced that a referendum would be held regarding the islands' political status as an overseas territory of the United Kingdom (UK). Gavin Short, chairman of the islands' legislative assembly, stated that the purpose of the vote, the date of which was chosen to align with the 30 year anniversary of the islands' breaking from Argentina's occupation, was to affirm that "the people of the Falklands wish for the Islands to remain a self-governing Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom." The vote was held in March 2013 and was overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining the current status, with only three people voting to change. The Argentine government, which continues to dispute its ownership of the islands with the UK, stated that the referendum should be rejected as an "illegitimate colonialist exercise."

Flag of the Falkland Islands

Learn more about territories of the United Kingdom from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Congress gave final approval to tobacco regulation bill

Iran Guardian Council certified contested election results

President Kennedy proposed Civil Rights Act of 1964

2013-06-11T04:00:00Z

On June 11, 1963, US President John F. Kennedy proposed what would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in a radio and television address to the American people. President Kennedy asked Congress to draft legislation to prohibit discrimination against Americans in public facilities. He also asked Congress to allow the federal government to take a more aggressive role in desegregating public schools and enforce the US Supreme Court ruling of Brown v. Board of Education. President Kennedy expressed concern over the "moral crisis" caused by racial inequality in the US, and asked whether the US could continue to advocate freedom across the globe when it had yet to do so at home. The Civil Rights Act was signed into law by US President Lyndon Johnson in July 1964, several months after President Kennedy was assassinated.

Learn more about civil rights from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Google told Congress data collection was lawful mistake

Finland court convicted Rwanda pastor of genocide

President Kennedy signed Equal Pay Act of 1963 into law

2013-06-10T04:00:00Z

On June 10, 1963, US President John Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act of 1963 into law. The Equal Pay Act prohibited discrimination on account of sex in the payment of wages by employers engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce. The law applied to male and female employees engaged in equal work that requires equal skill, effort and responsibility and is performed under similar working conditions, with few exceptions. When President Kennedy signed the act into law, female employees in the US earned on average 60 percent of the wage paid to similarly situated male employees. President Kennedy was troubled by the affect of pay disparity on working mothers, who had to incur the costs of childcare on top of their unequal wages. He considered the Equal Pay Act a positive step towards remedying the situation.

Learn more about sex discrimination from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Three Guantanamo detainees died in apparent suicide pact

Peru suspended controversial indigenous land laws

Federal court upheld Internet wiretap law

2013-06-09T04:00:00Z

On June 9, 2006, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a ruling [PDF] that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) could require broadband Internet companies and Internet phone service providers to comply with the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act [PDF] (CALEA). The CALEA required that telecommunication companies allow law enforcement agencies to have access to their networks. Broadband Internet services have historically been classified as an information service, but for the purposes of the act, the federal appeals court allowed the FCC to classify broadband providers differently.

Learn more about the Federal Communications Commission from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Sixth Circuit upheld Ten Commandments injunction in Kentucky courthouses

Germany court rejected Spain Demjanjuk extradition request

US Senate rejected Native Hawaiian self-governance bill

2013-06-08T04:00:00Z

On June 8, 2006, the US Senate rejected a Native Hawaiian self-governance bill that proposed to create a process for Native Hawaiians to receive federal recognition similar to Native American tribes. The bill was sponsored by Senator Daniel Akaka, who said the purpose of the bill was to correct the wrongs that occurred since the US aided in overthrowing the Hawaiian monarchy in 1893. Those who opposed the bill argued that it created an unconstitutional government entity based on race, serving only to divide the American people into distinct groups. In December 2009, the Congressional House Committee passed an unamended version of the bill, but it failed to pass into law. More recently, in December 2012, Senator Akaka called for the passage of the bill in honor of deceased Hawaiian Senator Daniel Inouye.

Learn more about Hawaii from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Eleventh Circuit heard arguments on constitutionality of new health care law

ICC prosecutor decried Sudan president's 'continued crimes against humanity'

US Supreme Court ruled on meaning of 'mistake' in civil procedure case

2013-06-07T04:00:00Z

On June 7, 2010, the US Supreme Court ruled that the word "mistake" in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 15(c)(1)(C) refers to whether the party being added to the case in question knew or should have known about the dispute. Krupski v. Costa Crociere, which was argued in April 2010, was granted certiorari in order to clarify a split in the lower courts on the correct application of the term. The decision reversed the Eleventh Circuit's ruling, clarifying that the rule does not rely on the plaintiff's knowledge. The US Supreme Court often resolves disputes in lower courts on the meanings of the various provisions in the FRCP, including in March 2013, when it issued an opinion that clarified that a judge can reach the merits of an underlying claim in determining whether to certify a class under FRCP 23(b).

Learn more about the US Supreme Court from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

US Senate approved Verrilli to replace Kagan as solicitor general

Egypt lifted ban on Muslim Brotherhood

Federal appeals court allowed asylum for victims of forced abortions

2013-06-06T04:00:00Z

On June 6, 2007, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that victims of forced abortions had the right to protest deportation by requesting asylum under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The court reversed an immigration court's finding that called into question whether the Chinese woman in question's abortion was forced and whether her and her husband had done enough to avoid the abortion. The court also ruled that the spouse of an individual subjected to a forced abortion had the right to request asylum. In June 2012, Chinese officials launched an investigation into claims that women in that country were being forced to have abortions as late as seven months into pregnancy.

Learn more about forced abortions from the JURIST news archive.

Also on This Day at Law:

Supreme Court ruled on patent rights to HIV testing process

Bahrain doctors, nurses were put on trial for treating injured protesters

California assembly passed marriage bill restoring gender-neutral language

2013-06-05T04:00:00Z

On June 5, 2007, the California State Assembly approved a measure restoring the state's marriage definition to its pre-1977 gender-neutral language. The measure was in response to the passage of Proposition 22, which changed that definition in March 2000. The bill eventually passed in the State Senate but was vetoed by the governor. In May 2008, the California Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 22, legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. The passage of Proposition 8 in November 2008 in turn banned same-sex marriage. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a challenge to the constitutionality of Proposition 8 in March 2013.

Read an overview of Same-Sex Marriage in Features.

Also on This Day at Law:

Federal appeals court upheld conviction of former Klansman

Nigeria arrested outgoing House Speaker on fraud allegations