<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:openSearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <description>Sidebar is JURIST's platform for legal professionals, offering perspectives by lawyers and judges on national and international legal developments. </description>
    <title>JURIST - Sidebar</title>
    <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar</link>
    <webMaster>JURIST@pitt.REMOVE_THISedu</webMaster>
         
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnists Michael Hausfeld and Kristen Ward Broz of Hausfeld, LLP argue that the jurisdiction of US courts should apply to any entity that has a presence within the US...Addressing Petitioners' oral argument before the US Supreme Court in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum (Shell) [PDF], Justice Samuel Alito said:What business does a case [alleging that a Dutch oil company aided and abetted human rights violations committed against Nigerian citizens by the Abacha dictatorship in Nigeria] have in the courts of the United States? ... There's no connection to the United States whatsoever.The answer to this question could profoundly</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/10/hausfeld-broz-kiobel-jurisdiction.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-10-02T16:15:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>The Business of American Courts in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/10/hausfeld-broz-kiobel-jurisdiction.php</link>
      <author>Stephanie Kogut</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnists Michael Hausfeld and Kristen Ward Broz of Hausfeld, LLP argue that the jurisdiction of US courts should apply to any entity that has a presence within the US...Addressing Petitioners' oral argument before the US Supreme Court in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum (Shell) [PDF], Justice Samuel Alito said:What business does a case [alleging that a Dutch oil company aided and abetted human rights violations committed against Nigerian citizens by the Abacha dictatorship in Nigeria] have in the courts of the United States? ... There's no connection to the United States whatsoever.The answer to this question could profoundly]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnist Kambiz Behi of EnterInvest and JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates examine discrepancies in the treatment of the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation under US trade policy...On August 22, Russia formally acceded into the World Trade Organization (WTO) as its 156th member. To date, however, the US Congress has not scheduled deliberation of any legislative measures aimed to grant Russia Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status &#151; a requirement under the WTO regulatory framework. Indeed, it seems that Congress may be unable to meaningfully deliberate on Russia's PNTR status in the short-term,</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/09/behi-tupaz-russia-pnt.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-09-11T14:30:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Double Standards in American Trade Policy: Russia and China</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/09/behi-tupaz-russia-pnt.php</link>
      <author>Jordan Barry</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnist Kambiz Behi of EnterInvest and JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates examine discrepancies in the treatment of the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation under US trade policy...On August 22, Russia formally acceded into the World Trade Organization (WTO) as its 156th member. To date, however, the US Congress has not scheduled deliberation of any legislative measures aimed to grant Russia Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status &#151; a requirement under the WTO regulatory framework. Indeed, it seems that Congress may be unable to meaningfully deliberate on Russia's PNTR status in the short-term,]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnists Joseph Marren, President and Chief Executive Officer of KStone Partners LLC, and Elizabeth Marren, a student at Fordham University School of Law, say that the Supreme Court's refusal to address the meaning of the Statement and Account Clause in its recent healthcare decision could lead to dire financial consequences...On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court resolved [PDF] constitutional challenges to two provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA): the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. The individual mandate requires most Americans to maintain a "minimum essential" health insurance coverage, and for many</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/09/marren-marren-medicaid-malpractice.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-09-05T10:50:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>ACA Medicaid Decision is Judicial Malpractice</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/09/marren-marren-medicaid-malpractice.php</link>
      <author>Clay Flaherty</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnists Joseph Marren, President and Chief Executive Officer of KStone Partners LLC, and Elizabeth Marren, a student at Fordham University School of Law, say that the Supreme Court's refusal to address the meaning of the Statement and Account Clause in its recent healthcare decision could lead to dire financial consequences...On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court resolved [PDF] constitutional challenges to two provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA): the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. The individual mandate requires most Americans to maintain a "minimum essential" health insurance coverage, and for many]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnist Emi MacLean, human rights attorney, argues that New York City has effectively criminalized protests by the actions taken against Occupy Wall Street since September 2011...On July 25, 2012, the Protest and Assembly Rights Project &mdash; a coalition of law school clinics &mdash; published the first in a series of reports on the state response to the Occupy Wall Street protests. Suppressing Protest: Human Rights Violations in the Police Response to Occupy Wall Street [PDF] focuses on New York City's response to the Occupy protests from their emergence in September 2011 until July 2012. The study compiles reports</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/emi-maclean-nypd-occupy.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-08-30T13:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>New York City Criminalizes Protests in the Context of Occupy Wall Street</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/emi-maclean-nypd-occupy.php</link>
      <author>Jordan Barry</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnist Emi MacLean, human rights attorney, argues that New York City has effectively criminalized protests by the actions taken against Occupy Wall Street since September 2011...On July 25, 2012, the Protest and Assembly Rights Project &mdash; a coalition of law school clinics &mdash; published the first in a series of reports on the state response to the Occupy Wall Street protests. Suppressing Protest: Human Rights Violations in the Police Response to Occupy Wall Street [PDF] focuses on New York City's response to the Occupy protests from their emergence in September 2011 until July 2012. The study compiles reports]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnist Kambiz Behi of EnterInvest and JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates examine the impact of the Russian Customs Union and the effects it has had on Eastern Europe...On January 1, 2012, Russia announced the establishment of a unified economic space with Belarus and Kazakhstan, forming a single market for goods, investment and labor. All border posts between and among the three states were removed, symbolizing an economic cooperation at its peak since the fall of the Soviet Union. This Russian-initiated plan is expected to evolve from initial economic reintegration into a political union &mdash; if</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/kambiz-behi-edsel-tupaz-russia-customs.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-08-22T12:30:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Russian Customs Union Encourages Growth in Eastern Europe</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/kambiz-behi-edsel-tupaz-russia-customs.php</link>
      <author>Sean Gallagher</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnist Kambiz Behi of EnterInvest and JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates examine the impact of the Russian Customs Union and the effects it has had on Eastern Europe...On January 1, 2012, Russia announced the establishment of a unified economic space with Belarus and Kazakhstan, forming a single market for goods, investment and labor. All border posts between and among the three states were removed, symbolizing an economic cooperation at its peak since the fall of the Soviet Union. This Russian-initiated plan is expected to evolve from initial economic reintegration into a political union &mdash; if]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnist Philip D. Cave, a solo practitioner at the The Law Offices of Philip D. Cave, argues that the lack of transparency in the WikiLeaks court-martial case undermines the reliability of the verdict...Have US military courts achieved the same level of transparency we have come to expect of criminal prosecutions in federal and state courts in the US? That's an underlying question presented in Center for Constitutional Rights, et. al. v Lind, Military Judge, a writ-appeal petition now pending with the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF). The petition is an outgrowth of United States v.</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/philip-cave-manning-public.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-08-17T11:40:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>How Public of a Trial: US v. Bradley Manning</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/philip-cave-manning-public.php</link>
      <author>Jordan Barry</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnist Philip D. Cave, a solo practitioner at the The Law Offices of Philip D. Cave, argues that the lack of transparency in the WikiLeaks court-martial case undermines the reliability of the verdict...Have US military courts achieved the same level of transparency we have come to expect of criminal prosecutions in federal and state courts in the US? That's an underlying question presented in Center for Constitutional Rights, et. al. v Lind, Military Judge, a writ-appeal petition now pending with the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF). The petition is an outgrowth of United States v.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates and JURIST Guest Columnist Ira Paulo Pozon of the Office of the Vice President of the Philippines examine Philippine adherence to the One-China policy and its effect upon diplomatic relations with Taiwan through the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office and the Manila Economic and Cultural Office...Since 1975, the Philippines has consistently upheld the "One-China policy" as the governing principle of Philippine-Chinese diplomatic relations. Philippine support of the policy was first established in the Philippine-China Joint Communique of June 9, 1975, in which the Philippines clearly stated that it "recognizes the Government of</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/tupaz-pozon-one-china.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-08-11T12:15:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Philippine Consistency: The One-China Policy</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/tupaz-pozon-one-china.php</link>
      <author>Clay Flaherty</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates and JURIST Guest Columnist Ira Paulo Pozon of the Office of the Vice President of the Philippines examine Philippine adherence to the One-China policy and its effect upon diplomatic relations with Taiwan through the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office and the Manila Economic and Cultural Office...Since 1975, the Philippines has consistently upheld the "One-China policy" as the governing principle of Philippine-Chinese diplomatic relations. Philippine support of the policy was first established in the Philippine-China Joint Communique of June 9, 1975, in which the Philippines clearly stated that it "recognizes the Government of]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Columnist Shafiq Jamoos, co-owner of the Jamoos Law Office, reviews the costs and benefits of international arbitration compared to traditional litigation...Are pears better than apples? It is a simple question. Yet, it does not have a simple response as there are no definite answers in evaluating the relative quality of fruit. The same can be said in the debate over the use of "arbitration" versus "litigation" to solve international legal problems. There is no definitive answer as to which is an inherently "better" process. I could argue for one answer or the other in an attempt to convince &mdash;</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/shafiq-jamoos-arbitration-litigation.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-08-06T13:30:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Is Litigation the Equal of Arbitration?</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/08/shafiq-jamoos-arbitration-litigation.php</link>
      <author>Clay Flaherty</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Columnist Shafiq Jamoos, co-owner of the Jamoos Law Office, reviews the costs and benefits of international arbitration compared to traditional litigation...Are pears better than apples? It is a simple question. Yet, it does not have a simple response as there are no definite answers in evaluating the relative quality of fruit. The same can be said in the debate over the use of "arbitration" versus "litigation" to solve international legal problems. There is no definitive answer as to which is an inherently "better" process. I could argue for one answer or the other in an attempt to convince &mdash;]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>JURIST Guest Columnist Ira Paulo Pozon of the Office of the Vice President of the Philippines and JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates say that the Philippine Supreme Court's decision in Chavez vs. JBC, Escudero and Tupas has comprehensively answered a pertinent constitutional question...In our previous JURIST article, we discussed the constitutional issues involving the composition of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the body created and empowered by the Philippine Constitution to recommend nominees to the president to fill judicial vacancies. Specifically, we discussed the constitutionality of congressional membership on the JBC. The Malolos Constitution and the</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/07/pozon-tupaz-jbc-membership.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-07-29T18:30:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Philippine Supreme Court Holding Clarifies Constitutional Ambiguity</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/07/pozon-tupaz-jbc-membership.php</link>
      <author>Stephen Krug</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[JURIST Guest Columnist Ira Paulo Pozon of the Office of the Vice President of the Philippines and JURIST Columnist Edsel Tupaz of Tupaz &amp; Associates say that the Philippine Supreme Court's decision in Chavez vs. JBC, Escudero and Tupas has comprehensively answered a pertinent constitutional question...In our previous JURIST article, we discussed the constitutional issues involving the composition of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the body created and empowered by the Philippine Constitution to recommend nominees to the president to fill judicial vacancies. Specifically, we discussed the constitutionality of congressional membership on the JBC. The Malolos Constitution and the]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>James P. Rudolph, an attorney and former official at the US Agency for International Development, argues that the Syrian government must follow stricter rules of engagement and could potentially be prosecuted for harsher war crime charges with the application of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions...The conflict in Syria &mdash; in which fighting between government forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and opposition forces has resulted in the deaths of upwards of 15,000 men, women and children &mdash; is now covered by common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. While at first blush this seems to be an unimportant</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/07/james-rudolph-syria-geneva.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-07-23T12:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Syrian Conflict Governed by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/sidebar/2012/07/james-rudolph-syria-geneva.php</link>
      <author>Jordan Barry</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[James P. Rudolph, an attorney and former official at the US Agency for International Development, argues that the Syrian government must follow stricter rules of engagement and could potentially be prosecuted for harsher war crime charges with the application of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions...The conflict in Syria &mdash; in which fighting between government forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and opposition forces has resulted in the deaths of upwards of 15,000 men, women and children &mdash; is now covered by common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. While at first blush this seems to be an unimportant]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>