Legal News for Weds 10/9 - Google To Breakup? Richard Glossip Death Row Appeal and SCOTUS Support for Regulation on "Ghost Guns"

Minimum Competence

This Day in Legal History: Che Guevara Executed

On October 9, 1967, Ernesto "Che" Guevara, a prominent figure in revolutionary movements across Latin America, was executed by Bolivian forces after being captured during a failed guerrilla campaign. Guevara was a key leader in the Cuban Revolution and sought to spread Marxist insurgencies throughout Latin America, hoping to ignite similar revolutions. His execution without a trial, carried out with the assistance of the CIA, became a controversial event, raising questions about the legal treatment of non-state actors under international law.

Che Guevara’s death highlighted the evolving legal frameworks for dealing with insurgencies, guerrilla warfare, and the rights of captured combatants. At the time, international law, including the Geneva Conventions, offered limited protection to guerrilla fighters, whose status as non-traditional combatants fell outside of established norms for prisoners of war. The Bolivian government's decision to execute Guevara without due process sparked widespread condemnation and intensified debates on the legality of such actions.

The legacy of Che Guevara’s execution extended far beyond his death, as it became a symbol of the broader struggles for political justice, human rights, and the use of state power to suppress insurgencies. His killing underscored the need for clearer international legal standards governing the treatment of insurgents, contributing to later discussions on how to apply humanitarian law to non-state actors and revolutionaries.

The U.S. government may seek to force Google to break up parts of its business, such as its Chrome browser and Android operating system, to address what it argues is an illegal monopoly in online search. A judge found in August that Google’s dominance—processing 90% of U.S. searches—violates antitrust laws. The Justice Department's proposed remedies aim to end Google’s control over search distribution and prevent its dominance from expanding into artificial intelligence (AI).

One suggestion is to stop Google from making billion-dollar payments to device manufacturers like Apple to have its search engine pre-installed as the default. Google plans to appeal, calling the proposals radical, and arguing that users choose its search engine for its quality. The company also claims it faces competition from platforms like Amazon. Additionally, a recent court ruling requires Google to allow more competition in its app store. The Justice Department's more detailed proposal will be submitted in November, and Google can respond by December.

The antitrust ruling against Google could have significant consequences for smaller companies like Mozilla, which heavily relies on Google's payments to make its Firefox browser financially viable. If Google is forced to stop paying for default search positions, Mozilla could lose a substantial portion of its revenue—more than $500 million annually—putting its future in jeopardy. This would limit Mozilla's ability to compete with larger players like Apple and Microsoft, and could further consolidate market power in the hands of Big Tech.

US considers breakup of Google in landmark search case | Reuters

Will Google's historic monopoly lawsuit be the death knell for Mozilla and Firefox? | Fortune

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip, who is seeking to have his conviction overturned for a 1997 murder-for-hire. Glossip, now 61, was convicted of paying Justin Sneed to kill Barry Van Treese, the owner of the motel where Glossip worked. Sneed, who confessed to the murder, testified against Glossip in exchange for avoiding the death penalty. Glossip admits to helping cover up the crime but denies commissioning the murder.

Newly uncovered evidence suggests that prosecutors withheld information that could have helped Glossip’s defense. Oklahoma's Attorney General, Gentner Drummond, now supports Glossip's appeal, acknowledging flaws in the case, though he still believes Glossip should face some punishment. Due to the attorney general’s stance, the Supreme Court appointed an outside lawyer to defend the conviction. The justices are expected to rule by June 2025.

US Supreme Court to weigh appeal by Oklahoma death row inmate Glossip | Reuters

The U.S. Supreme Court is signaling support for President Biden's regulation of "ghost guns," or build-at-home firearm kits, by likely allowing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to regulate these kits as firearms. The rule, introduced in 2022, would require serial numbers, background checks, and record-keeping for gun kits, treating them like fully assembled guns. Challengers, including gun-rights advocates, argue that the rule expands beyond the authority granted by the 1968 Gun Control Act. However, several justices, including Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett, expressed skepticism about the challengers’ claims, noting how easily kits can be turned into functioning firearms. The case echoes past legal battles over firearms regulation, such as the one involving bump stocks, and centers on the scope of the ATF’s power.

Supreme Court Signals Backing for Biden’s ‘Ghost Gun’ Rule (1)

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe