<?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>Today in legal history.</description>
    <title>JURIST - This Day at Law</title>
    <link>http://jurist.org/thisday</link>
    <webMaster>JURIST@pitt.REMOVE_THISedu</webMaster>
        
    
    <item>
      <description>On October 5, 2010, the Bangkok Criminal Court dismissed charges of money laundering and fraud that had been brought against suspected Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. The court stated that there was insufficient evidence, and other technicalities influenced the decision to drop the charges. The charges had been filed by Thai prosecutors in conjunction with US prosecutors. Bout could face charges in the US for conspiracy to kill US nationals and supporting terrorism. Emblem of Thailand Learn more about Viktor Bout from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day at Law: NYC car bomber sentenced to life in prison China restricted human organ transplants from prisoners</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/thailand-court-dismissed-charges-against-suspected-russia-arms-dealer.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-10-05T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Thailand court dismissed charges against suspected Russia arms dealer</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/thailand-court-dismissed-charges-against-suspected-russia-arms-dealer.php</link>
      <author>Katherine Bacher</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On October 5, 2010, the Bangkok Criminal Court dismissed charges of money laundering and fraud that had been brought against suspected Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout. The court stated that there was insufficient evidence, and other technicalities influenced the decision to drop the charges. The charges had been filed by Thai prosecutors in conjunction with US prosecutors. Bout could face charges in the US for conspiracy to kill US nationals and supporting terrorism. Emblem of Thailand Learn more about Viktor Bout from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day at Law: NYC car bomber sentenced to life in prison China restricted human organ transplants from prisoners]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>On October 4, 2011, jury selection began for suspected terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was accused of attempting to bring down a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day 2009 with a bomb in his underwear. Abdulmutallab was charged with eight felonies and could face life in prison. Abdulmutallab will be representing himself, and a federal judge ruled that statements made by Abdulmutallab while in a hospital will be admitted during the trial. Learn more about terrorism from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day at Law: DOJ sued credit card companies for antitrust violations ICC, UN signed cooperation agreement</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/jury-selection-began-for-accused-plane-bomber.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-10-04T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Jury selection began for accused plane bomber</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/jury-selection-began-for-accused-plane-bomber.php</link>
      <author>Katherine Bacher</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On October 4, 2011, jury selection began for suspected terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was accused of attempting to bring down a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day 2009 with a bomb in his underwear. Abdulmutallab was charged with eight felonies and could face life in prison. Abdulmutallab will be representing himself, and a federal judge ruled that statements made by Abdulmutallab while in a hospital will be admitted during the trial. Learn more about terrorism from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day at Law: DOJ sued credit card companies for antitrust violations ICC, UN signed cooperation agreement]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>On October 3, 2010, two Israeli soldiers were convicted of using a 9-year-old boy to search bags for explosives during the 2008-2009 Gaza war. The boy made a statement to an advocacy group, Defense for Children International, stating that he feared the soldiers would kill him if he did not search their bags. The tribunal stated that Israel's Supreme Court had banned the use of human shields and similar tactics, including this situation. The UN Human Rights Council has been addressing reports of human rights concerns during the Gaza war. Coat of arms of Israel Learn more about the Gaza war from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/israel-military-tribunal-convicted-soldiers-of-using-boy-to-search-for-explosives.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-10-03T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Israel military tribunal convicted soldiers of using boy to search for explosives</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/israel-military-tribunal-convicted-soldiers-of-using-boy-to-search-for-explosives.php</link>
      <author>Katherine Bacher</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On October 3, 2010, two Israeli soldiers were convicted of using a 9-year-old boy to search bags for explosives during the 2008-2009 Gaza war. The boy made a statement to an advocacy group, Defense for Children International, stating that he feared the soldiers would kill him if he did not search their bags. The tribunal stated that Israel's Supreme Court had banned the use of human shields and similar tactics, including this situation. The UN Human Rights Council has been addressing reports of human rights concerns during the Gaza war. Coat of arms of Israel Learn more about the Gaza war from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>On October 2, 2011, California Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 768, a bill preventing local governments from banning male circumcision, into law. The law was created as a response to a San Francisco ballot measure called the Male Genital Mutilation Bill, which prohibited male circumcision. A San Francisco judge had ruled in July 2011 that the measure could not appear on the ballot because it served no legitimate purpose and was preempted by California's Business and Profession Code, prohibiting regulation of medical services. Learn more about legal issues surrounding circumcision from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day at Law: Nine US states sued EPA under Clean Water Act</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/california-governor-signed-bill-prohibiting-circumcision-bans.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-10-02T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>California governor signed bill prohibiting circumcision bans</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/california-governor-signed-bill-prohibiting-circumcision-bans.php</link>
      <author>Garrett Eisenhour</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On October 2, 2011, California Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 768, a bill preventing local governments from banning male circumcision, into law. The law was created as a response to a San Francisco ballot measure called the Male Genital Mutilation Bill, which prohibited male circumcision. A San Francisco judge had ruled in July 2011 that the measure could not appear on the ballot because it served no legitimate purpose and was preempted by California's Business and Profession Code, prohibiting regulation of medical services. Learn more about legal issues surrounding circumcision from the JURIST news archive. Also on This Day at Law: Nine US states sued EPA under Clean Water Act]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>On October 1, 2011, US President Barack Obama gave a speech reaffirming his intent to fight for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Among measures discussed that his administration had undertaken for equal rights, President Obama cited the recent repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) on September 20, 2011. In February 2011, Congressional Democrats introduced the Respect for Marriage Act, following the Department of Justice (DOJ) statement that it would no longer defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA. In September 2012, the DOJ asked the Supreme Court to consider two new challenges to DOMA, bringing the total number pending to four. US President Barack</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/obama-reaffirmed-support-for-doma-repeal.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-10-01T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Obama reaffirmed support for DOMA repeal </title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/10/obama-reaffirmed-support-for-doma-repeal.php</link>
      <author>Garrett Eisenhour</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On October 1, 2011, US President Barack Obama gave a speech reaffirming his intent to fight for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Among measures discussed that his administration had undertaken for equal rights, President Obama cited the recent repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) on September 20, 2011. In February 2011, Congressional Democrats introduced the Respect for Marriage Act, following the Department of Justice (DOJ) statement that it would no longer defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA. In September 2012, the DOJ asked the Supreme Court to consider two new challenges to DOMA, bringing the total number pending to four. US President Barack]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>On September 30, 2009, International Criminal Court (ICC) chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced that the court would be prosecuting those responsible for 2007 post-election violence in Kenya because of the country's failure to establish its own tribunal. Because Kenya is a signatory to the Rome Statute, the ICC had jurisdiction over the case in the event that Kenya could not establish an appropriate tribunal. The trials against the four defendants are set to begin in April 2013. The combined charges include rape, murder, forcible transfer and persecution. International Criminal Court Learn more about Kenya from the JURIST news archive, and read an overview of the International Criminal Court in Features.</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/09/icc-announced-prosecution-of-suspects-for-kenya-2007-post-election-violence.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-09-30T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>ICC announced prosecution of suspects for Kenya 2007 post-election violence</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/09/icc-announced-prosecution-of-suspects-for-kenya-2007-post-election-violence.php</link>
      <author>Kimberly Bennett</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On September 30, 2009, International Criminal Court (ICC) chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced that the court would be prosecuting those responsible for 2007 post-election violence in Kenya because of the country's failure to establish its own tribunal. Because Kenya is a signatory to the Rome Statute, the ICC had jurisdiction over the case in the event that Kenya could not establish an appropriate tribunal. The trials against the four defendants are set to begin in April 2013. The combined charges include rape, murder, forcible transfer and persecution. International Criminal Court Learn more about Kenya from the JURIST news archive, and read an overview of the International Criminal Court in Features.]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <description>On September 29, 2011, two rights organizations filed an indictment [PDF] against former US president George W. Bush with the Canadian Department of Justice for allegations that he commissioned a torture program during his time in office. The indictment was the second of the year; the first was filed in Geneva, Switzerland. In October 2011, however, the Attorney General for British Columbia blocked the lawsuit, prompting outcry that failure to proceed with the lawsuit violated international law. Signing of the Military Commissions Act Learn more about George W. Bush from the JURIST news archive, and read commentary on the Canadian AG's decision from Guest Columnists Matt Eisenbrandt and Katherine Gallagher</description>
      <guid>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/09/rights-groups-filed-canadian-indictment-against-bush-for-torture.php</guid>
      <pubDate>2012-09-29T00:00:00-05:00</pubDate>
      <title>Rights groups filed Canadian indictment against Bush for torture</title>
      <link>http://jurist.org/thisday/2012/09/rights-groups-filed-canadian-indictment-against-bush-for-torture.php</link>
      <author>Kimberly Bennett</author>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On September 29, 2011, two rights organizations filed an indictment [PDF] against former US president George W. Bush with the Canadian Department of Justice for allegations that he commissioned a torture program during his time in office. The indictment was the second of the year; the first was filed in Geneva, Switzerland. In October 2011, however, the Attorney General for British Columbia blocked the lawsuit, prompting outcry that failure to proceed with the lawsuit violated international law. Signing of the Military Commissions Act Learn more about George W. Bush from the JURIST news archive, and read commentary on the Canadian AG's decision from Guest Columnists Matt Eisenbrandt and Katherine Gallagher]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>