Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Burden of proof (1)
- Campaign finance (1)
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (1)
- Due Process (1)
- False advertising (1)
-
- False-marking (1)
- Federal Circuit (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Freedom of speech (1)
- Gonzaga University v. Doe (1)
- Independent Living Center v. Shewry (1)
- Lankford v. Sherman (1)
- Medicaid (1)
- Patents (1)
- Public corruption (1)
- Qui tam (1)
- Section 1983 (1)
- Supremacy Clause (1)
- Voting rights (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Public Corruption Concerns And Counter-Majoritarian Democracy Definition In Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Daaron Kimmel
Public Corruption Concerns And Counter-Majoritarian Democracy Definition In Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission, Daaron Kimmel
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In determining the shape of the free speech rights and anti-corruption concerns that courts must balance in campaign finance cases, judges are influenced by their own underlying understandings of what an ideal democracy should look like. For judges to decide whether the government is appropriately regulating the political process, the rules that allow all citizens to interact with and shape their democracy, judges must first decide what that democracy ought to look like. This affords judges a great deal of discretion in campaign finance cases. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a particularly bold judicial attempt to reshape the …
Markedly Low: An Argument To Raise The Burden Of Proof For Patent False Marking, Caroline Ayres Teichner
Markedly Low: An Argument To Raise The Burden Of Proof For Patent False Marking, Caroline Ayres Teichner
Chicago-Kent Law Review
The Federal Circuit's liberal treatment of the patent false-marking statute, 35 U.S.C. § 292, has created a climate in which opportunistic qui tam plaintiffs facing a low burden of proof can recover potentially enormous sums of money under the statute with no showing of competitive injury. This note argues that the Federal Circuit erred by ruling that plaintiffs must prove the key element of false-marking claims—namely, intent to deceive the public—by a mere preponderance of the evidence, and further contends that the court should have adopted the clear and convincing standard instead. Support for this elevated burden of proof can …
When A Door Closes, A Window Opens: Using Preemption To Challenge State Medicaid Cutbacks, Martina Brendel
When A Door Closes, A Window Opens: Using Preemption To Challenge State Medicaid Cutbacks, Martina Brendel
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Following the Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Gonzaga University v. Doe, several circuit courts of appeal have disallowed enforcement of key Medicaid provisions under § 1983. Notably, courts have placed no similar restrictions on the enforceability of these provisions under the Supremacy Clause. This article discusses Lankford v. Sherman and Independent Living Center v. Shewry, two recent appellate decisions in which plaintiffs succeeded in preventing Medicaid cuts under a preemption theory. It then addresses the limits of the Supremacy Clause, which applies to a narrower range of state action than § 1983. It argues that Medicaid reimbursement rates are "laws" …