USLegal Reporter

A week after the measure passed the US Senate, the House of Representatives passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act Thursday, which prohibits the use of genetic testing in employment and health insurance practices. Although federal law already addresses race and gender discrimination, the new legislation will specifically prevent employers from using genetic tests in deciding whether to hire, fire or promote a particular individual and insurance companies in deciding whether an individual is eligible for healthcare coverage and in setting the amount of that individual’s premium.

Many employers across the country currently conduct medical exams of employees and use genetic testing to measure certain healthcare risks and hazards, while insurance companies in the past have restricted coverage based on findings of genetic tests. To combat this practice, individuals have been refusing genetic testing and have been paying cash under a false name. Most states have current legislation regarding genetic discrimination by healthcare insurance companies and many have enacted similar employment genetic discrimination laws.

The bill is H.R. 493.

Source: http://news.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1153//05-02-2008/20080502063504_28.html

The U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Monday upheld a decision by a U.S. District Judge to block a Minnesota law that would fine minors under the age of 17 when purchasing or renting video games with adult ratings. The state argued that minors do not have a First Amendment right to watch violent video games. The court referenced biblical and literary violence as having constitutional protection and rejected the $25 fines as an unconstitutional restriction on free speech.

The ruling is similar to a previous ruling by the same court in 2003 blocking a Missouri law and giving violent video games First Amendment protection. Courts in other states, including California, Illinois, Louisiana and Michigan have also enjoined the enforcement of similar laws.

Source: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/03/federal-appeals-court-rules-minnesota.php

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security issued final regulations Friday for the REAL ID Act, legislation which was passed in 2005 as an effort to decrease driver’s license or other government identification fraud by terrorists and illegal immigrants.

As a result of much opposition from civil liberties organizations with privacy concerns and 17 states that have enacted laws or resolutions objecting to the Act’s costs, implementation of the Act has been extended from its original date in 2008 to a phase-by-phase implementation to be completed between 2011 and 2017. States will be required to seek a waiver for more time to comply with the law if the state wants its residents’ current driver’s licenses to remain valid for air travel after May 2008. If a state fails to seek a waiver, its residents will be required to use a passport or a new federal passport document to avoid secondary security screenings. All states must begin checking social security numbers and immigration status of driver’s license or identification card applicants over the next year. Ultimately, states will be required to check with the State Department for verification of applicants who use passports to obtain driver’s licenses, to verify birth certificates and to communicate with other states to ensure applicants do not have multiple licenses.

Homeland Security has decreased state implementation costs of the Act from $14.6 billion to $3.9 billion and claims that although the new identity cards will have security measures, they will not contain microchips. The new rules also allow a limited exemption for persons over 50 years of age: such persons will be exempt from the requirement that by 2014, persons must show a REAL ID driver’s license or identification card in order to board an airplane or enter a federal building. The regulations provide states with more time to comply with the Act by not imposing these requirements on persons 50 years of age or older until 2017.

Source: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/01/homeland-security-issues-real-id-act.php; http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080111/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/secure_driver_s_licenses

The University of Colorado said today that it has reached a settlement in a lawsuit brought by two women who alleged that they were sexually assaulted by football players and recruits at an off-campus party. Lisa Simpson will receive $2.5 million while Anne Gilmore will be paid $350,000 to resolve both claims.

The university will also add a staff position in its Office of Victim’s Assistance and will conduct a study to avoid future misconduct.

The women claimed in their lawsuit that the university knew of the risk of sexual harassment in connection with the football recruiting program, but failed to stop it. They said this was a violation of Title IX, a federal law which mandates equality in education. 

The scandal led to the resignations of university President Elizabeth Hoffman and Athletic Director Dick Tharp. 

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601079&sid=adDAPsNWyMd4&refer=home

U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton in Tacoma, Washington signed an injunction Thursday that allows pharmacists in Washington state to refuse to sell the ‘morning-after’ or ‘Plan B’ birth control pill if they can refer a customer to another nearby pharmacy where the drug is available.

In July, two pharmacists and a drugstore owner filed a civil rights lawsuit against the state for regulations passed in July that required pharmacies to dispense Plan B, and only allowed pharmacists with personal or moral objections to refuse if another pharmacist in the same pharmacy could dispense the drug.

The parties asked the judge to prevent required Plan B sales while the suit is pending. Leighton stated that ‘[o]n the issue of free exercise of religion alone, the evidence before the court convinces it that plaintiffs … have demonstrated both a likelihood of success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury.’

Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2004003599_planb09m.html

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/o/632/11-09-2007/80950015c5b07ca4.html

The Florida Supreme Court unanimously held Thursday that its lethal injection procedures, including more recently implemented safeguards, do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The Florida Attorney General stated that the state plans on moving forward with the execution of Mark Dean Schwab, scheduled for November 15, 2007.

Schwab, who was convicted of a 1991 rape and murder, claimed that the chemicals used in lethal injection methods can cause excruciating pain and that new evidence shows he personally suffers from a brain impediment. The argument regarding pain caused by lethal injection chemicals is identical to the claim in the Kentucky case that is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Source: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/11/florida-supreme-court-upholds-state.php

The U.S. Supreme Court late Tuesday granted Earl Wesley Berry’s stay of execution pending the Court’s decision on granting certiorari. Berry was scheduled to be executed by lethal injection for the murder of a woman he kidnapped in 1987.

The stay adds to the list of three other stays granted by the Supreme Court after its decision to review the constitutionality of the lethal injection methods in a Kentucky case.

Richard Dieter, the executive director of the Anti-Capital Punishment Death Penalty Information Center claims that a de facto moratorium on executions by lethal injection is now in place.

Source: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/10/supreme-court-blocks-mississippi-lethal.php

A federal appeals court Wednesday stayed the lethal injection of Daniel L. Siebert, whose execution was scheduled for Thursday for several murders in 1986. Following the refusal by the federal district court in Alabama to stay his exectuion, Siebert appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Siebert, who suffers from pancreatic cancer, claimed that the drugs used for lethal injection could negatively interact with his cancer medications to cause unnecessary pain and suffering.

The state argued that Sibert could be executed using a modified procedure, but the modifications did not involve any change to the chemicals or to the sequence in which they are administered. The federal appeals court held that the changes to the protocol were ‘minor’ and stated that the execution shold be postponed until the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of lethal injection.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/10/federal-appeals-court-stays-alabama.php

Pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in a Kentucky case regarding the constitutionality of the three drug cocktail used in lethal injection executions and in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision to stay an execution in Virginia upon a constitutional challenge to lethal injection, the Georgia Supreme Court last Thursday granted a stay to Jack Alderman, who was scheduled to be executed by lethal injection Friday for the murder of his wife in 1974.

Monday of this week, the Georgia Supreme Court again halted an execution scheduled for Tuesday of Curtis Osborne, who was convicted of double murder in 2001.

Source: http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=607&docId=l:l:689311086&topicId=12755&source=undefined&start=2&topics=single

House Democrats Wednesday withdrew the RESTORE Act of 2007 from the House floor following a motion by Republicans to amend the bill to state that it would not prevent surveillance on Osama Bin Laden or other terrorist groups.

Also, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee considered Thursday a separate bill that would expire in six years and would provide immunity to telecommunication companies that were involved in domestic surveillance without court orders. The legislation would amend the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and would require dismissal of civil lawsuits against the telecommunication companies upon certification by the attorney general that either the companies participated in eavesdropping between September 11, 2001 and January 17, 2007 with the President’s written authorization to assist in detecting or preventing a terrorist attack on the U.S. or that a particular company or companies provided no assistance. The legislation also requires the attorney general to certify the existence of probable cause that an American is acting against the U.S. before the government can conduct surveillance.

Source: http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/10/us-senate-committee-debates.php