Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Law and Society (3)
- Civil Rights (2)
- Health Law and Policy (2)
- Medical Jurisprudence (2)
-
- Selected Professional Activities (2)
- State constitutional law (2)
- Abortion (1)
- Baker v. State (1)
- Bioethics (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil rights (1)
- Common Benefits Clause (1)
- Constitutional jurisprudence (1)
- Constitutional scholarship (1)
- Courts (1)
- Fetus (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Individual liberty (1)
- Judges (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law school curriculum (1)
- Legal Analysis and Writing (1)
- Legal Education (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Lemuel Shaw (1)
- Massachusetts Declaration of Rights (1)
- New Judicial Federalism (1)
- Personhood (1)
- File Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Life And Death Decision-Making: Judges V. Legislators As Sources Of Law In Bioethics, Charles Baron
Life And Death Decision-Making: Judges V. Legislators As Sources Of Law In Bioethics, Charles Baron
Charles H. Baron
In some situations, courts may be better sources of new law than legislatures. Some support for this proposition is provided by the performance of American courts in the development of law regarding the “right to die.” When confronted with the problems presented by mid-Twentieth Century technological advances in prolonging human life, American legislators were slow to act. It was the state common law courts, beginning with Quinlan in 1976, that took primary responsibility for gradually crafting new legal principles that excepted withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment from the application of general laws dealing with homicide and suicide. These courts, like the …
Baker V State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Lawrence Friedman, Charles Baron
Baker V State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Lawrence Friedman, Charles Baron
Charles H. Baron
In Baker v. State, the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that the state constitution's Common Benefits Clause prohibits the exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage. Baker has been praised by constitutional law scholars as a prototypical example of the New Judicial Federalism. The authors agree, asserting that the decision sets a standard for constitutional discourse by dint of the manner in which each of the opinions connects and responds to the others, pulls together arguments from other state and federal constitutional authorities, and provides a clear basis for subsequent development of constitutional principle. This Article …
The Supreme Judicial Court In Its Fourth Century: Meeting The Challenge Of The "New Constitutional Revolution", Charles H. Baron
The Supreme Judicial Court In Its Fourth Century: Meeting The Challenge Of The "New Constitutional Revolution", Charles H. Baron
Charles H. Baron
In the mid-19th century, when the United States was confronted with daunting changes wrought by its expanding frontiers and the advent of the industrial revolution, its state supreme courts developed the principles of law which facilitated the nation's growth into the great continental power it became. First in influence among these state supreme courts was the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts-whose chief justice, Lemuel Shaw, came widely to be known as "America's greatest magistrate." It is this tradition that the court brings with it as it develops its place in the "new constitutional revolution" presently sweeping our state supreme courts. …
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
Charles H. Baron
In Baker v. State, the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that the state constitution’s Common Benefits Clause prohibits the exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage. Baker has been praised by constitutional scholars as a prototypical example of the New Judicial Federalism. The authors agree, asserting that the decision sets a standard for constitutional discourse by dint of the manner in which each of the opinions connects and responds to the others, pulls together arguments from other state and federal constitutional authorities, and provides a clear basis for subsequent development of constitutional principle. This Article explores …
The Concept Of Person In The Law, Charles Baron
The Concept Of Person In The Law, Charles Baron
Charles H. Baron
The focus of the abortion debate in the United States tends to be on whether and at what stage a fetus is a person. I believe this tendency has been unfortunate and counterproductive. Instead of advancing dialogue between opposing sides, such a focus seems to have stunted it, leaving advocates in the sort of “I did not!” – “You did too!” impasse we remember from childhood. Also reminiscent of that childhood scene has been the vain attempt to break the impasse by appeal to a higher authority. Thus, the pro-choice forces hoped they had proved the pro-life forces “wrong” by …
Bioethics And Law In The United States: A Legal Process Perspective, Charles Baron
Bioethics And Law In The United States: A Legal Process Perspective, Charles Baron
Charles H. Baron
No abstract provided.
Bioethics And Law In The United States: A Legal Process Perspective, Charles Baron
Bioethics And Law In The United States: A Legal Process Perspective, Charles Baron
Charles H. Baron
No abstract provided.