The case, In re: Social Media Adolscent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Litigation, is a consolidated multi-district litigation (MDL) under 28 USC 1407. The lawsuit combines claims brought by a coalition of State Attorneys General who sued Meta in 2023. The trial will hear consumer protection claims brought by California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, along with federal claims brought by 29 states under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (COPPA). The states argue that Meta violated consumer protection laws by implementing platform features such as infinite scrolling and autoplay which are specifically designed to maximize the amount of time that young users spend on the platforms. The initial complaint filed by Massachusetts notes:

[Meta] has intentionally designed its flagship social media platforms, especially Instagram, to be addictive to youth, preying upon young people’s unique psychological vulnerabilities and overcoming their ability to decide how much time they spend on Meta’s platforms.

The states further allege that Meta has violated COPPA by collecting data from users that were known to be under the age of 13 without first obtaining parental consent.

Prior to the start of trial, Meta petitioned the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to block the matter from proceeding to a jury trial, arguing that it was immune under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which shields internet platforms from liability based on their hosted content. The court rejected that argument, finding that Section 230 “provides a defense to liability, not immunity from suit.”

The trial now proceeds before an eight-person jury operating in an advisory capacity under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 39(c). However, the presiding judge retains sole authority to determine liability and award damages. The states seek civil penalties which have been estimated to be as high as $1.4 trillion. The trial is expected to last for several weeks and will include testimony from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. The case will be closely watched as a bellwether for related suits pending as part of this MDL in addition to parallel state lawsuits and potential future claims against other social media providers.

The post Meta disputes claims of deliberately addicting minors as landmark social media trial begins appeared first on JURIST - News.

The Fourth Circuit’s opinion recounts sworn declarations describing how congregations have changed how they worship since DHS lifted the enforcement limits. Roni Kingsley, clerk of the Richmond Friends Meeting, one of six Quaker organizations that sued, said in a declaration that a member “expressed concern that he could be mistaken for being undocumented and feared the idea of enforcement actions in or around the meeting.” At Oakland Baptist Church, affiliated with the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF), Rev. Dr. Jeff Hayes said immigrant congregants “are now afraid to come to our sacred space…since DHS’s policy means they might be targeted.” Another CBF congregation reported a 66 percent drop in attendance at its English-as-a-second-language classes.

In Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends v. US Department of Homeland Security, No. 25-1512, a unanimous three-judge panel held that the documented attendance declines were a “predictable effect” of the 2025 policy sufficient to establish standing, and that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim that the policy violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Senior Judge Barbara Milano Keenan wrote the opinion, joined in full by Judges Pamela Harris and G. Steven Agee, who also concurred separately. The panel found DHS waived any compelling-interest defense by failing to raise it or present evidence below.

DHS rescinded a 2021 policy limiting enforcement near “protected areas,” including churches, schools, and hospitals, in a January 20, 2025 memo signed by then-Acting Secretary Benjamin Huffman, President Trump’s first day back in office. The memo dispensed with “bright line rules” on enforcement locations, instructing agents to rely on their own discretion instead.

Six Quaker organizations, Sikh Temple Sacramento, and CBF sued DHS in the US District Court for the District of Maryland. Judge Theodore Chuang granted a preliminary injunction in February 2025 covering the plaintiffs’ congregations but declined to extend it nationwide. Judge Agee’s concurrence stressed the injunction’s narrow scope, noting DHS may still make arrests at the plaintiffs’ properties with a warrant, in hot pursuit, or during genuine emergencies.

The plaintiffs said in a joint statement that the ruling “reaffirms a fundamental promise of religious liberty” and that they would keep litigating “to ensure that religious freedom remains meaningful for every congregation.” DHS’s original statement announcing the policy said “criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest” and that the administration trusted agents “to use common sense,” language a DHS spokesperson repeated to Government Executive when asked about Tuesday’s ruling.

The injunction remains in effect as the case returns to the district court for further proceedings on the merits. The Quaker groups had previously sued over the policy when they first filed their lawsuit in January 2025.

The post US appeals court affirms injunction blocking immigration enforcement at houses of worship appeared first on JURIST - News.

In March 2025, fighting erupted between government forces (the South Sudan People’s Defense Forces, or SSPDF) and the “White Army,” a youth militia associated with the SPLM-IG in Nasir, Upper Nile. The government is reported to have bombed a populated area, resulting in civilian caualties in Nasir, Longechuk and Ulang counties. The violence spread to Jonglei State, and by March 2026, over 100,000 people were fleeing across the border to Ethiopia.

The commission has documented conflict-related violations, sexual violence, and the recruitment and use of children in hostilities in various locations, including Western Equatoria in 2021 and 2024; Unity State in 2018, 2022, and 2026; and now Nasir and Jonglei. The violence has been attributed to concerns over the use of oil revenue by South Sudan’s political and military elites, leading to malnutrition and exclusion from educational and health care resources.

Despite this instability, the government plans to move forward with the December 2026 elections. In July 2026, President Kiir signed a bill to remove pre-election requirements outlined in the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (RARCSS). RARCSS is a peace agreement signed in 2018 to end the 2013-2018 Sudan Civil War between followers of President Salva Kiir and First Vice President Riek Machar. It comprised six chapters and goals to ensure constitutionally sound and politically stable elections: (1) governance, (2) permanent ceasefire and security arrangements, (3) humanitarian assistance, (4) economic and resource management, (5) transitional justice, and (6) a permanent constitution-making process. Assessments conducted in 2022, 2024, and 2026 reveal that these goals have yet to be implemented.

In addition to the threat of violence, the UN Commission members are concerned about the increasing exclusivity of political participation and the propensity of the upcoming election to enhance existing divisions. Commissioner Barney Afako noted, “The guns are returning while the safeguards for peaceful political competition are disappearing. That is a profoundly dangerous trajectory.” The credibility of the election rests not on whether it occurs as planned, but whether it embodies democracy, according to Commissioner Carlos Castresana Fernández. To ensure integrity, he says, citizens should be able to “vote without fear,” political opponents must “participate freely,” courts shall “resolve disputes independently,” and institutions require the ability to “constrain the exercise of power.”

The post Renewed violence in South Sudan as elections near, UN reports appeared first on JURIST - News.

The STF ruled that protective measures under the law apply to all forms of gender-based violence, not just domestic or intimate partner violence. The court expanded the scope by relying on international treaties on fundamental human rights, including the Belém do Pará Convention.

The convention defines gender-based violence to comprise violence in workplaces, schools, communities, and political spaces. It allows for protection during elections, addressing violence against female candidates. The STF provided protective measures such as restraining orders, electronic monitoring, removal of aggressors, and preventive detention.

In the first half of 2026, 340,000 urgent protective measures for women were granted a 170 percent increase compared to 2020 through the Maria da Penha Law.

Justice Edson Fachin also cited data from the 2026 Atlas of Violence prepared by the Institute for Applied Economic Research, which found that nearly 294,000 women were victims of non-lethal violence in Brazil in 2026. 64 percent occurred in domestic settings, but many cases arose in public and institutional spaces.

Justice Cármen Lúcia emphasized that femicide and harassment often occur outside the home, requiring broader legal protection. The Brazilian Justice said, “With this ruling, this Supreme Court shows it is not blind or deaf to all this happening against all of us women.”

Brazil’s ruling is reinforced by international human rights law, which mandates states to protect women from violence in both public and private spheres. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) obligates states to eliminate discrimination and ensure equality in law and practice. This decision aligns with Article 2 of CEDAW, requiring effective legal protection against gender-based violence.

The post Brazil top court strengthens protections for women against gender-based violence appeared first on JURIST - News.

Türk stated that “arrests and resulting court proceedings…must be fully consistent with international human rights standards, as well as Zambian domestic law.” He continued: “All detainees must be notified…of the reasons for their arrest” and “allowed to access legal representation.” The rights chief concluded that “it is essential to uphold respect for human rights and ensure that any grievances arising from the election are voiced and addressed peacefully, and in accordance with international human rights law.”

Incumbent president Hakainde Hichilema was declared the winner with around 60 percent of the presidential vote. His main rival, opposition leader Brian Mundubile, received about 38 percent. Vote counting was suspended and then restarted hours later by the electoral commission, which cited assaults against polling station officials and stolen ballot papers. This then led to the deployment of riot police and soldiers. This election was reported as abnormally tense for a country that has had relatively peaceful elections since 1991.

Amnesty International recently cautioned about authoritarian risk ahead of the elections, “warning that persistent state crackdowns on free speech and peaceful assembly now pose[d] a serious threat.” Before that, the organization urged Zambian authorities to release a journalist arrested in July.

Mundubile declared victory before final results came out, claiming the election had been rigged. He noted “discrepancies between the results found at polling stations,” said “military involvement during the vote count had altered the final results,” and demanded an independent investigation. Mandubile stated that heavily armed personnel had raided his residence after the election, while Zambian officials said that he had been “at the scene when 11 people were apprehended.” A former government minister was reportedly killed in the raid.

The post UN rights chief flags Zambia opposition arrests after election appeared first on JURIST - News.

The court’s statement described the sanctions as a “flagrant attack” against its judicial independence, hindering the performance of its mandate under the Rome Statute. It warned that the sanctions targeting its personnel have placed the international legal order at risk, as the measures sought to deter the court from applying the law and limit victims’ ability to seek redress and justice.

The latest sanctions expanded their coverage to nine of the 18 ICC judges, two deputy prosecutors, former prosecutor Karim Khan and one staff member.

In response to the sanctions against Tomoko Akane, a Japanese judge, Japan’s Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi said at a Wednesday press conference that the situation was “very unfortunate,” indicating her plan to continue communication with relevant countries, including the US. On the same day, the Japanese foreign ministry added that the country has “consistently supported the ICC” and remains committed to strengthening the international rule of law. The UN Secretary-General António Guterres also expressed his serious concern about the sanctions.

In a Thursday statement, France also reaffirmed its “unwavering support” for the ICC, condemning all threats and coercive measures against the court.

On Tuesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the newest round of sanctions under President Donald Trump’s executive order of February. He said Akane and Seye had directly engaged in investigations and prosecutions against government officials from countries outside the court’s jurisdiction, calling it a “dangerous precedent.” Quoting media reports, UN News confirmed that Seye has been investigating Israel’s role in the West Bank, such as funding and providing weapons to settlers.

The sanctions followed Rubio’s diplomatic campaign to dismantle the ICC, beginning in mid-July. In an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal, he announced the country’s intention to work with its allied governments to take the court apart “brick by brick, if necessary.” The campaign is, however, facing challenges in courts from human rights groups, Palestinian-related advocacy groups, and ICC judges. They similarly argued that Trump exceeded his authority to issue the executive order, the sanctions violated their First and Fifth Amendment rights, and the sanctions are arbitrary and unlawful under the domestic Administrative Procedure Act.

Established in 2002, the court has 125 state parties. They have at least twice stated their support for the court’s operation in June 2024 and February 2025.

The post ICC condemns latest US sanctions against its president and prosecutor appeared first on JURIST - News.

The hackers have been involved in several attacks over the years. The DOJ revealed that they:

conducted a coordinated campaign of cyber intrusions into computer systems for 144 U.S.-based universities, 178 foreign universities, at least 42 U.S.-based private sector companies, at least 11 foreign private sector companies, at least five U.S. federal and state government agencies, and at least two non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The Mabna Institute stole more than 31 terabytes of academic data and intellectual property from these universities, as well as the email accounts of employees at the private sector companies, government agencies, and NGOs.

Protection of the intellectual property of US companies, universities, and government organizations is imperative to the country’s structure and future innovation, the press release said. All 14 charges do not apply to each of the 17 defendants, but each charge ranges from a maximum of five to 20 years in prison. US attorney for the Southern District of New York Jamie McDonald stated that “these charges make clear that the passage of time will not deter us from identifying and pursuing those who target the United States from abroad.”

The IRGC is a branch of Iran’s military that operates separately from the regular army and reports directly to the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The force includes a cyber command that works with affiliated businesses on military and commercial espionage and propaganda distribution.

According to the DOJ, the Mabna Institute was founded in 2013 to assist Iranian organizations in gaining access to non-Iranian academic networks, scientific data, scholarly journals, and books. In 2018, nine of the 17 defendants were charged in a seven-count indictment.

The US government is offering a reward of up to $10 million for information regarding the whereabouts of Saber Shahbaziz Ballojeh, Keyvan Fayaz, Mojtaba Galekuhi, Arman Kahzadian and Behzad Mesri.

The post US DOJ charges 17 Iran nationals in hacking campaign against US appeared first on JURIST - News.

The alleged labor abuses include issues concerning both working and living conditions. Workers reported payment of low and incorrect wages, lack of potable water during the workday, lack of sanitation and electricity, and violent treatment by private security forces, among other abuses.

The majority of sugarcane field workers are Haitian or of Haitian descent, either permanently settled in the DR or recent migrants. CAL’s report documents significant barriers and immigration policies that prevent Haitians from obtaining documents and building a secure life in the DR, meaning that they are “particularly vulnerable to labor exploitation.” One worker described this challenging cycle to CAL, stating: “Of course I want to leave…but I don’t have the documents that would allow me to do what I want to do.”

Another worker described the culture of fear and uncertainty. “I want to complain every week but since everyone is so scared, nobody will support you,” the worker said.

The company at the center of the investigation is Central Romana, the largest landowner and employer in the DR. The company is incorporated in Florida and also owns ASR Group, the world’s largest refiner of cane sugar. The companies are owned by the powerful Fanjul family, who have known ties to US President Donald Trump’s administration, including hosting a fundraiser that grossed approximately $50 million for Trump’s campaign and making millions in donations to the Make America Great Again Political Action Committee.

President Joe Biden’s administration imposed an import ban in 2022 based on “reasonable indication” of forced labor. This included five of the International Labour Organization’s indicators of forced labor: exploitation of vulnerability, isolation, withholding of wages, abusive working and living conditions, and excessive overtime.

Central Romana responded by lobbying the US government to have the ban removed. Trump quietly lifted the ban in 2025, following the above-mentioned donations, raising allegations of financial influence on the decision. Advocates, including CAL, indicated that there was no significant change in working and living conditions to warrant lifting the ban.

Central Romana was offered the opportunity to respond to the allegations in the report. They profusely denied all findings, expressing shock that CAL would be willing to publish a report that was “riddled with inaccuracies and untruths.”

CAL is a nonprofit founded in 2017 to respond to widespread human rights violations in the corporate context. The organization’s mission is to harness “the creative potential of the law” to diminish corporate abuse, and to protect people and the planet.

The mistreatment of Haitians in the DR has been long-documented by other rights groups, including Amnesty International. These abuses include mass deportations and racial profiling.

The post Corporate human rights watchdog finds forced labor persists on Dominican Republic plantations appeared first on JURIST - News.

After Mangione pleaded guilty to two federal stalking counts last Friday and admitted he shot UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, DOJ prosecutors signaled that they would pursue the maximum potential sentences of life in prison when Mangione is sentenced on December 18. Mangione’s attorneys urged Justice Gregory Carro to dismiss the state charges, citing the defendant’s guilty plea to the federal counts. The attorneys stated, “Mangione should not…be punished for the same conduct twice under New York’s law prohibiting double jeopardy.” Mangione has pleaded not guilty to the state charges, which also carry a possible life sentence, and his attorney complained that “dueling federal and state prosecutions had turned him into a human ping-pong ball.”

New York has broad double jeopardy protections for criminal defendants, allowing a federal guilty plea to bar state prosecution if the case involves the same conduct or transaction. By statute, New York law provides that a previous prosecution bars a second prosecution when “two offenses [are] based upon the same act or criminal transaction.” However, there are exceptions for offenses that “have substantially different elements” and where “the acts establishing one offense are…clearly distinguishable.” The Manhattan District Attorney’s office maintains that “the state charges, including murder and firearms offenses, involve different legal elements and criminal conduct.” However, Mangione’s attorneys argue that the federal and state charges are “all part of the same criminal incident.”

Justice Carro’s order gives the District Attorney’s Office until October 9 to respond to the claims of double jeopardy, and a hearing will take place on December 10.

The post Mangione’s state trial postponed amid double jeopardy concerns appeared first on JURIST - News.

Rights group Pusat KOMSAS responded to the petition, stating: “Narratives like this deliberately portray the Rohingya community as only taking from the country, while ignoring the fact that many of them contribute to Malaysia’s economy despite living in precarious conditions and facing frequent exploitation.”

These recent events have rekindled my bittersweet memory of working as a volunteer at an exhibition titled “To Kill A Movement” organized by Amnesty International Malaysia from June 21 to July 5.

Firstly, it’s a sweet memory because I had the opportunity to network with new people and work alongside them, spending my weekend meaningfully. On the other hand, the memory is somehow tainted by the display of horrific images of the destruction caused by the conflict in Myanmar following the military junta’s coup d’état in 2021.

The primary purpose of the exhibition was to showcase photos taken by journalists during the conflict in Myanmar and the disturbing images of children being tortured by the military. During the launch of the exhibition, we also had a panel discussion with speakers from diverse backgrounds, including those who had lived the experience.

The theme “To Kill A Movement” is derived from Myanmar’s long struggle linked to wider movements against authoritarianism across borders. A movement rarely dies in a single blow. Rather, what kills any legitimate movement is persistent repression. The cornering, exhaustion, fracturing, starvation, enforced disappearance, and defamation effectively kill a movement from pursuing its end goal.

It is heart-wrenching to even visualize the cruelty that the people in Myanmar had to experience merely because they were born Muslims in their country. It provokes me further when Malaysians relentlessly seek the removal of refugees from the country without having regard to the fact that the very removal could not only jeopardize someone’s life but endanger an entire generation.

This is the reality of today’s humanity that exists not only in Malaysia but in all parts of the world, where geographical privilege renders someone born in a secure country losing sight of the realities of those born in a conflict country. State leaders cannot advocate for justice, equality, and a rules-based order when they actively engage in inhumane actions or are passively complicit in genocide by returning refugees to countries where they face a risk of persecution or torture.

It is essential to emphasize here that although Malaysia has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention, the principle of non-refoulement is universally recognized and obliges all countries to refrain from returning refugees who are at risk of persecution or torture. As the conflict in Myanmar is ongoing, particularly the perpetration of violence against the Rohingya community, Malaysia has an international obligation to provide temporary shelter for the refugees or deport them to a third country where they do not face a risk of persecution or torture.

Although the exhibition was focused on the destruction caused to the Myanmar community in general, the risk of repatriating the Rohingya community to Myanmar is nonetheless a relevant issue here, as they face an increased risk of torture and persecution during the military junta’s administration.

Here are some of the pictures that I had taken during the exhibition:

These pictures show the bombing of residential areas and schools.

These are pictures of online protesters using flowers as a weapon of defiance.

These are a few of nearly 1,000 images taken after the abduction, torture, and extrajudicial killing of children, women, and men, and published in military-controlled Telegram channels since 2021.

These pictures show the systemic targeting of educational and civilian infrastructures, subjecting schools and hospitals to relentless artillery fire and aerial bombardments.

This is a photo of a soldier being taken care of by a comrade in a bunker following an arm amputation, as most of the hospitals were destroyed in the bombing.

These cloths hung from the ceiling were an imitation of how htamein, the traditional cloth long associated with women’s daily life, was transformed by women and gender diverse communities as a weapon of defiance and to confront the misogyny and superstition embedded in military power.

Although Malaysia is not a party to the Refugee Convention, it hosts around 181,000 refugees and asylum-seekers on humanitarian grounds, with 85 percent of them from the Rohingya community. In July, Malaysia also launched a national registration system for refugees and asylum-seekers as the single authoritative registration in the country, aiming to replace the registration system managed by the UNHCR.

Relatedly, Amnesty International Malaysia’s spokesperson Divya Shesshan said, “While we welcome the government’s efforts to develop a national refugee registration system and move towards formal recognition of refugees in Malaysia, any transition away from UNHCR registration must not leave refugees and asylum-seekers without access to protection procedures.” This, in essence, underscores the nuances behind policies involving refugees and asylum-seekers, as well as the importance of the government stepping up to implement the policies.

Ultimately, to address the situation involving refugees more effectively, we, as human beings, must cultivate compassion and forbearance within ourselves. With the prevalence of populist-based politics around the world, the way citizens treat vulnerable communities is crucial in determining whether a nation can be pressured to uphold its international duty towards these “unwelcome guests.”

While recognizing the collective legal responsibility of states is vital, we should also advocate for the moral responsibility of society in a country if we wish to see a world where people fleeing conflicts are welcomed warmly rather than expelled coldly.

The post Malaysia dispatch: revisiting the ‘To Kill A Movement’ exhibition appeared first on JURIST - News.

Nuclearelectrica, the state-owned operator of the Cernavodă plant, began the controlled shutdown of Unit 2 on August 13, citing the critically low flow of the Danube. Unit 1 had already been taken offline in late July because of the same conditions. The two reactors, each with a capacity of approximately 700 megawatts, normally provide around 20 percent of Romania’s electricity.

The Cernavodă reactors use water from the Danube for cooling. In an effort to keep Unit 2 operating, Romanian authorities had undertaken measures to increase the availability of cooling water, including interventions to redirect the river’s flow towards the plant. These measures ultimately proved insufficient as the Danube continued to fall to historically low levels.

According to Nuclearelectrica, the shutdown was carried out in a controlled manner and does not pose a nuclear safety risk. The decision reflects the plant’s operational requirements concerning availability of coolant rather than a malfunction of the reactor.

The incident also raises questions concerning the management of water resources used by critical infrastructure. Nuclearelectrica operates the Cernavodă plant under water-management authorizations governing its use of Danube water. The company’s regulatory arrangements include obligations concerning water quality, environmental protection, and the management of impacts on ecosystems and human health.

The shutdown has significant consequences for Romania’s energy system. The government has declared an energy emergency for August and is increasing electricity production from alternative sources, including coal, hydropower, and wind, while also relying on imports. Authorities have urged households and businesses to reduce electricity consumption during peak evening hours.

The disruption has regional implications because Romania is an important electricity supplier to neighboring Moldova. The loss of domestic nuclear generation places additional pressure on Romania’s electricity market and may reduce the amount of electricity available for export.

The situation also illustrates the vulnerability of river-dependent energy infrastructure to extreme weather conditions. Similar difficulties have affected nuclear power generation elsewhere along the Danube, including at Hungary’s Paks nuclear power plant, where low river levels have reduced available cooling capacity.

Romanian authorities will need to balance the continued operation of critical energy infrastructure with nuclear-safety requirements and the sustainable management of increasingly scarce water resources. The Cernavodă shutdown therefore highlights a developing regulatory challenge for Romania: ensuring the resilience of essential infrastructure as extreme drought conditions place greater pressure on the water resources on which that infrastructure depends.

The post Romania dispatch: low Danube levels force shutdown of Cernavodă nuclear reactor appeared first on JURIST - News.

Marie Struthers, Amnesty International’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia director, called the charges “blatant reprisals for exercising his right to freedom of expression to call for peace,” and demanded his immediate and unconditional release.

The sentence from a Pskov City Court judge combines penalties under Article 280.3 of the Criminal Code, which imposes penalties for repeated “discrediting” of the armed forces, and Article 207.3, which criminalizes dissemination of “knowingly false information” about the Russian military, and carries up to 15 years in a penal colony. Both provisions were introduced by Federal Law No. 32-FZ, signed into law on March 4, 2022.

Shlosberg was also convicted in November 2025 under Russia’s “foreign agent” law, and sentenced to 420 hours of community service—despite calls for a 12-year term by prosecutor Anna Goryacheva.

The Article 207.3 charge rested on a Telegram post Shlosberg reposted on February 25, 2022, seven days before Federal Law No. 32-FZ was signed. Shlosberg argued throughout proceedings that he could not be prosecuted under a law that did not exist when he acted. The Article 280.3 charge stemmed from a video debate in which Shlosberg called for an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine. According to Mediazona, prosecutors attributed statements to him that were made by his debate opponent, the very positions Shlosberg was arguing against. Judge Victoria Malyamova concluded the judicial investigation phase without defense counsel present, and Shlosberg was never cross-examined in court. In his final statement, Shlosberg asserted that the case had no authentic legal substance and was designed to punish him for his political stance.

Shlosberg, 63, is deputy chairman of Yabloko, the only registered Russian party openly opposing the war in Ukraine. Authorities have previously targeted the party: in May 2025, police raided a Yabloko event in Yekaterinburg and detained 10 attendees. On the same day as the Shlosberg sentencing, Russia’s Supreme Court rejected Yabloko’s appeal of its removal from the September 20 State Duma ballot—the first time a party had been removed from a Duma election since 1999—over alleged copyright and campaign finance violations, following a challenge by nationalist party Rodina and supported by both the Central Election Commission and state prosecutors. Yabloko chairman Nikolai Rybakov said the party would challenge the ruling before Russia’s Constitutional Court.

The post Russia sentences anti-war politician Shlosberg to 11 years in prison appeared first on JURIST - News.

The NAACP’s Office of General Counsel will work alongside civil rights attorney Ben Crump and the Wells legal team to push for a thorough investigation and increased transparency from the authorities. “We’re taking up this fight to search for truth and to demand transparency concerning the tragic death of Nolan Wells,” stated the NAACP’s general counsel Kristen Clarke. “Our investigation will be victim-focused, community-based and sensitive to the ongoing pain felt by Nolan Wells’ family and his community.”

Wells disappeared on July 4, 2026, on Horn Island, a barrier island located off the Mississippi Gulf Coast. His body was discovered on the island’s shoreline two days later. Investigators initially said there was no sign of foul play and believed that he had drowned. However, an independent autopsy arranged by the family and presented at the NAACP’s 117th National Convention in Chicago last month concluded that the cause of Wells’ death is still unknown.

The Congressional Black Caucus separately wrote a letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel last week urging a federal review of the circumstances surrounding Wells’ disappearance and death.

“The world is watching, and Nolan Wells’ family deserves a thorough accounting of what happened,” said NAACP president and CEO Derrick Johnson. “Too often, the deaths of young Black people are dismissed, downplayed, or inadequately investigated unless we demand answers. Our involvement in this case is part of our ongoing commitment to make sure those answers are pursued with urgency and respect for Black lives.”

The post NAACP joins legal team seeking investigation into death of Black Mississippi teen Nolan Wells appeared first on JURIST - News.

The Regional Conference on Population and Development (CRPD) will be held in the Uruguayan capital of Montevideo on August 18-20.

Ahead of the event, Amnesty International urged states to uphold their commitments under the Montevideo Consensus, one of the region’s most significant intergovernmental agreements on the rights of various population groups in the region, as defined by gender, ethnicity, age, and other factors.

Human rights advocates have long documented concerns regarding women’s health impacts in the region, owing to poor implementation of legal protections against gender based violence, femicide, child marriage, and restrictive reproductive rights.

Amnesty International indicated that the upcoming CRPD must prioritize gender justice and ensure that women’s rights groups are not dismantled and defunded, and that the Montevideo Consensus must be fully actualized in order to stop perpetuating the standard of institutionalized violence, coercion, and exploitation of women and girls.

“Amid a relentless wave of attacks on the rights of women, girls, and adolescents, the Montevideo Consensus must continue to be a roadmap for the protection of human rights and not a mere list of outstanding promises,” said Amnesty International’s Americas director Ana Piquer. “Current challenges require concrete actions, adequate resources and effective accountability mechanisms.”

Despite the heightened aggression towards women’s rights organizations, groups and feminist movements such as UN Women and the Girls, Not Mothers campaign are working to bring light to and address the severity of the inequality faced by these populations. In recent years, UN Women has worked to enable women’s political participation and economic empowerment, as well as combat violence against women through the Belém do Pará Convention.

“Every woman, girl and adolescent must be able to make free and informed decisions regarding their bodies, every woman survivor of violence must have support and protection from the state, and every woman defender must be able to demand justice and equality without fear of reprisals,” said Piquer.

The post Latin American and Caribbean governments face pressure to restore women’s rights safeguards at Montevideo talks appeared first on JURIST - News.

The denial comes a month and a half after the court’s initial refusal to grant the president’s appeal of the $5 million jury trial judgment against him. Carroll collected her award, plus interest, last month—three years after the 2023 verdict.

The case developed from statements Trump made in 2022 concerning Carroll. In his petition for the court to reconsider its initial denial, the president argued the trial was “propped up by a series of indefensible evidentiary rulings,” particularly testimony from other alleged Trump assault victims. The president requested the court to “review…whether the judgment could stand even though [Carroll] relied on evidence that was inadmissible according to President Trump.”

On first appeal, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that such testimony was permissible under federal evidence rules 413 and 415, which generally permit evidence “that the defendant committed any other sexual assault” in such cases. The Supreme Court did not comment on the lower court’s reasoning in its denial. 

Trump’s petition came alongside a separate petition to the court over a separate defamation case brought by Carroll against the president, in which a jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in 2024. That case largely involves statements made by Trump in 2019 during his first presidential term. Trump has argued the statements were “official Presidential acts [and] may not be used as evidence to impose liability for other conduct,” citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. US, which held that presidents are immune from criminal prosecution for official acts.

The court will likely announce in early September whether it will hear the concurrent appeal.

The post US Supreme Court refuses Trump rehearing request on E. Jean Carroll case appeared first on JURIST - News.