Law 26364 is aimed at preventing and sanctioning the trafficking of persons and supporting trafficking victims in Argentina. Articles 2 and 3 define trafficking as the recruitment, transfer, reception, or shelter of people for the purposes of exploitation. Article 3 explicitly makes clear that consent by a minor is invalid.
Law 27736 amends Law 26485 and seeks to protect women’s dignity, reputation, and identity online. Article 4 (amending Article 6 of Law 26485) clarifies that digital violence is considered violence against women.
Law 27501, enacted on April 16, 2019, amends the Comprehensive Protection Law for Women (Law 26485) to address public space harassment, often to as “street harassment,” as a distinct form of violence against women.
Articles 2444 through 2461 outline Argentina’s forced heirship system. The system vests certain individuals with the right to succeed the decedent and have certain portions of the decedent´s estate reserved for them, regardless of the decedent’s testamentary instrument or testamentary gifts. Article 2444 defines such forced heirs as including descendants, ascendants, and spouses.
Law 27696, the Mandatory Medical Program of National Social Works for the integral treatment of victims of gender violence, was enacted on November 10, 2022, to grant medical and preventative treatment for victims of gender-based violence through the Mandatory Medical Program (PMO) (Article 1). To achieve its objective, Law 27696 requires all healthcare institutions, at the national and local level, to adopt plans that monitor gender-based violence and grant adequate measures to address it (Article 2).
Law 26485, the Comprehensive Protection Law for Women, was enacted on July 20, 2010 to eliminate discrimination between men and women, protect women’s right to live a life without violence, and to affirm the access to justice for women who suffer from violence (Article 1, letters (a), (b), and (f), respectively).
Law 23592, Exercise of Constitutional Rights and Guarantees: Measures Against Discriminatory Acts, criminalizes certain types of discrimination in Argentina. Article 1 ensures that Argentines can exercise all their fundamental rights and guarantees recognized in the Constitution and lists race, religion, nationality, ideology, political opinion, opinion on unions, sex, economic position, social condition, and physical characteristics as its bases for discrimination.
Do statutes that limit the amount a political party can donate in coordination with a political candidate violate the First Amendment?
This case asks the Court to determine whether 52 U.S.C. § 30116 of the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”) violates the First Amendment rights of political parties wishing to coordinate donations for their preferred candidates’ political campaigns. FECA was established to set a cap on a political party’s coordinated expenditures to prevent circumvention of contribution limits. Petitioners, National Republican Senatorial Committee (“NRSC”), National Republican Congressional Committee (“NRCC”), former Senator J.D. Vance, and former Representative Stephen Chabot (collectively “NRSC”), argue that the limits on coordinated party expenditures violate the First Amendment because they infringe their speech and political association rights. NRSC further argues that Colorado II, a case in which the Supreme Court previously upheld coordinated party expenditure limits, should not control this case. The Court-appointed attorney Roman Martinez, invited to support the judgment below, argues that the coordinated party expenditure limits are necessary to achieve the government interest in preventing quid-pro-quo corruption between donors and candidates, and that Colorado II must control this case’s outcome. Martinez further highlights several justiciability concerns. The outcome of this case could impact political corruption deterrence and Congress’ ability to regulate campaign finance.
Whether the limits on coordinated party expenditures in 52 U.S.C. § 30116 violate the First Amendment, either on their face or as applied to party spending in connection with "party coordinated communications" as defined in 11 C.F.R. § 109.37.
Congress enacted the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”) in 1972 to regulate political campaign spending. National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission (“NRSC v. FEC”) at 4. The FECA imposes a variety of limits on individual contributions to political parties and on political parties’ campaign spending.
Law 26743 codifies the definition of gender identity and ensures its protections. Article 2 defines gender identity as an internal and individual experience which may or may not correspond to an individual's sex assigned at birth. Article 1 recognizes the right for a person to be recognized and freely develop in accordance with their gender identity, including government identification.
Law 27636 is aimed at achieving inclusion and equality of trans people in an employment context. Article 7 of the law affirms the right for trans people to work, and the right to not be discriminated against for the duration of their employment. Article 5 requires that federal government entities have at least 1% of their workforce be trans people.
