Digital Commons Network^™

Alito Versus Roe V. Wade: Dobbs As A Means Of Circumvention, Avoidance, Attenuation And Betrayal Of The Constitution, Antony Hilton

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

There can be no argument that Justice Alito is a learned justice of great knowledge and reason, and has a superb grasp of the law. As such, despite any opposition to or disagreement with his legal opinions, he is deserving of respect for his intellectual prowess, in general and as it relates to the Constitution. Notwithstanding all the aforementioned, wrong is wrong.

The Surprising Harms Hidden Within The No Surprises Act, Madeleine Amick-Kehoe

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Amendment And Online Access To Information About Abortion: The Constitutional And Technological Problems With Censorship, John Villasenor

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

To what extent could an abortion-restrictive state impede access to online information about abortion? After Dobbs, this question is no longer theoretical. This essay engages with this issue from both a legal and technological perspective, analyzing First Amendment jurisprudence as well as the technological implications of state-level online censorship. It concludes that the weight of Supreme Court precedent indicates that state attempts to censor information regarding out-of-state abortion services would violate the First Amendment. That said, the essay also recognizes that as Dobbs itself upended precedent, it is unclear what Supreme Court would do when ruling on questions regarding …

Inherent Powers And The Limits Of Public Health Fake News, Michael P. Goodyear

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In a Vero Beach, Florida, supermarket, Susan Wiles rode her motorized cart through the produce aisle. In any year other than 2020 or 2021, this would have been a routine trip to the grocery store. But in 2020, Mrs. Wiles was missing an accessory that had become ubiquitous in society during that year: a face mask. Despite causing a commotion, Mrs. Wiles stood by her decision, claiming that the concerns about COVID-19 were overblown: “I don’t fall for this. It’s not what they say it is.” Mrs. Wiles’ statement is emblematic of the year 2020. This is not the …

Presumptively Awful: How The Federal Government Is Failing To Protect The Constitutional Rights Of Those Adjudicated As Mentally Ill, As Illustrated By The 18 U.S.C. § 922(G)(4) Circuit Split, Kaitlyn M. Rubcich

Pepperdine Law Review

The Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits are split as to whether the 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) federal firearms ban violates the Second Amendment rights of those who were once adjudicated as mentally ill but have since returned to good mental health. In Beers v. Attorney General, the Third Circuit applied its own unique framework and held that § 922(g)(4) is constitutional. Meanwhile, the Sixth Circuit applied intermediate scrutiny in Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Department and deemed the statute unconstitutional, while in Mai v. United States, the Ninth Circuit also applied intermediate scrutiny but held that § 922(g)(4) is constitutional. …

Answering The Call: A History Of The Emergency Power Doctrine In Texas And The United States, P. Elise Mclaren

St. Mary's Law Journal

During times of emergency, national and local government may be allowed to take otherwise impermissible action in the interest of health, safety, or national security. The prerequisites and limits to this power, however, are altogether unknown. Like the crises they aim to deflect, courts’ modern emergency power doctrines range from outright denial of any power of constitutional circumvention to their flagrant use. Concededly, courts’ approval of emergency powers has provided national and local government opportunities to quickly respond to emergency without pause for constituency approval, but how can one be sure the availability of autocratic power will not be abused? …

(Un)Masking The Truth - The Cruel And Unusual Punishment Of Prisoners Amidst The Covid-19 Pandemic, Ariel Berkowitz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Law Enforcement Welfare Checks And The Community Caretaking Exception To The Fourth Amendment Warrant Requirement, Andrea L. Steffan

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Opioid Litigation: The Fda Is Mia, Catherine M. Sharkey

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

It is readily agreed that federal preemption of state tort law alters the balance between federal and state power. Federal preemption is a high-profile defense in almost all modern products liability cases. It is thus surprising to see how little attention has been given to federal preemption by courts and commentators in the opioid litigation. Opioid litigation provides a lens through which I explore the role of state and federal courts and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in striking the right balance of power. My purpose here is not to resolve the divide among the few courts that have …

Decisions In The Dark: Why "Pregnancy Exclusion" Statutes Are Unconstitutional And Unethical, Shea Flanagan

Northwestern University Law Review

Advance health care directives are tools that allow people to state their health care treatment wishes or designate a health care proxy in anticipation of being unable to make those decisions in the future, including preferences to remove life-sustaining medical treatment. However, thirty-six states currently have “pregnancy exclusion” laws that require physicians to void the advance directives of pregnant women receiving life-sustaining treatment. This Note assesses the constitutionality and ethics of state pregnancy exclusion statutes by employing a new five-category typology of current pregnancy exclusion laws. This Note argues that all categories of these statutes violate an individual’s constitutional rights …

Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division Second Department

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Due Process Supreme Court Appellate Division

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tears In Heaven: Religiously And Culturally Sensitive Laws For Preventing The Next Pandemic, Eloisa C. Rodriguez-Dod, Aileen Maria Marty, Elena Maria Marty-Nelson

Catholic University Law Review

This Article argues that laws created to curtail the spread of deadly contagious diseases need to be drafted and implemented in ways that maximize acceptance of an affected communities’ cultural and religious beliefs. When laws are put in place that are inconsistent with community mores, the overall goal of stopping an epidemic is threatened. Communities often distrust government and other relief organizations who mandate rules and regulations that impinge their religious and cultural beliefs; thus, these regulations geared at helping communities can paradoxically undermine the goal of preventing the spread of infectious disease.

This Article focuses on the need for …

Testing For Regulatory Penalties: Insuring The Health Of Fedrealism In The Age Of Obamacare, Steven Z. Hodaszy

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

State Funding Of Nontherapeutic Abortions; Medicaid Plans; Equal Protection; Right To Choose An Abortion; Beal V. Doe, Maher V. Roe, Poelker V. Doe, Constance Leistiko

Akron Law Review

In Beal v. Doe the United States Supreme Court held that Title XIX of the Social Security Act permits but does not require states participating in the Medicaid program established by that Act to fund nontherapeutic abortions. In the companion cases of Maher v. Roe and Poelker v. Doe, the same majority held in Maher that the Equal Protection Clause does not require a state that funds childbirth and therapeutic abortions to also fund the costs of nontherapeutic abortions, and in Poelker, that the Constitution does not prohibit a state or city from forbidding the performance of elective …

Right To Privacy; Removal Of Life-Support Systems; Leach V. Akron General Medical Center, Stephanie Zembar

Akron Law Review

The decision in Leach v. Akron General Medical Center, marked Summit County's acceptance of the trend allowing the removal of life support systems from an incompetent terminally ill patient. Technological advancements have enabled the medical profession to maintain a person indefinitely in a chronic vegetative state. These advancements have blurred traditional definitions of death and have raised legal, medical and ethical questions to be resolved within our court system. The Leach case was one of first impression in Ohio, and the decision should aid in establishing a framework from which members of the legal and medical professions, as well …

Emergency Contraceptives Or "Abortion-Inducing" Drugs? Empowering Women To Make Informed Decisions, Ryan M. Hrobak, Robin Fretwell Wilson

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Consequences Of Abortion Restrictions For Women's Healthcare, Maya Manian

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Medical Assumption At The Foundation Of Roe V. Wade And Its Implications For Women's Health, Clarke Forsythe

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Legal Implications Of Substance Abuse Testing In The Workplace, Michael S. Cecere, Phillip B. Rosen

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

A Broke(N) System: Comment On The Supreme Court's Decision To Rule On The Equal Access Provision In Douglas V. Independent Living Center, And Its Potential Impact On The Affordable Care Act, Megan Waugh

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This comment first provides a historical and legal backdrop of the Medicaid system, the Equal Access Provision and private individuals' enforcement of the Equal Access Provision through litigation in order to analyze the outcome of Douglas in light of the Supreme Court's decision in the Affordable Care Act Case. Then taking that analysis, this article recommends an approach to handle either a cause of action or no cause of action under the Supremacy Clause upon the implementation of PPACA.

Is The Doctor In? The Contemptible Condition Of Immigrant Detainee Healthcare In The U.S. And The Need For A Constitutional Remedy, Kate Bowles

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Benign Sex Discrimination Revisited: Constitutional And Moral Issues In Banning Sex-Selection Abortion , George Schedler

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right To Refuse Life Sustaining Medical Treatment And The Noncompetent Nonterminally Ill Patient: An Analysis Of Abridgment And Anarchy, Elizabeth Helene Adamson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Procedural And Judicial Limitations On Voir Dire - Constitutional Implications And Preservation Of Error In Civil Cases., R. Brent Cooper, Diana L. Faust

St. Mary's Law Journal

The right to a trial by jury is meaningless without an effective voir dire. Recurring tort reform, rapid technological advancements, immediate access to media coverage of incidents that give rise to litigation have greatly expanded. Consequentially, courts are faced with the prospect that potential jurors’ opinions and attitudes have been tainted. In addition to these issues, trial courts display significant interest in promptly expediting the advancement of their dockets. Voir dire is an essential element of trial strategy. Voir dire allows counsel to establish rapport with potential jurors, introduce them to the issues and facts of the case, and identify …

Texas Law's Life Or Death Rule In Capital Sentencing: Scrutinizing Eight Amendment Violations And The Case Of Juan Guerrero, Jr., John Niland, Riddhi Dasgupta

St. Mary's Law Journal

The United States Supreme Court has never explained the Eighth Amendment’s impact in noncapital cases involving a mentally retarded or brain-injured defendant. The Court has not provided guidance to legislatures or lower courts concerning the acceptable balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors and the role that mitigating factors must play in the sentencing decision. A definitive gap exists between the protections afforded to a criminal defendant facing a life sentence as opposed to those confronted with the death penalty. The Court requires sentencing procedures to consider aggravating and mitigating factors, including mental retardation and brain damage, when imposing a death …

Public Health And Constitutional Law: Recognizing The Relationship, Wendy E. Parmet

Journal of Health Care Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Mental Disorder And The Civil/Criminal Distinction, Grant H. Morris

San Diego Law Review

This essay, written as part of a symposium issue to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the University of San Diego Law School, discusses the evaporating distinction between sentence-serving convicts and mentally disordered nonconvicts who are involved in, or who were involved in, the criminal process–people we label as both bad and mad. By examining one Supreme Court case from each of the decades that follow the opening of the University of San Diego School of Law, the essay demonstrates how the promise that nonconvict mentally disordered persons would be treated equally with other civilly committed mental patients was made and …

School Voucher Programs: Has The Supreme Court Pulled Up The Gangplank To Establishment Clause Challenges., Cecil C. Kuhne Iii

St. Mary's Law Journal

The Establishment Clause is not violated when a program is neutral toward religion and provides assistance directly to a broad class of citizens, who in turn voluntarily direct the aid to religious schools. A program containing these features permits government aid to reach religious institutions only thru the deliberate choices of individuals. Any incidental advancement or endorsement of religion is attributable to the individual recipient—not the government, which simply acts as a disburser. In Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, the Supreme Court reiterated this rationale from a twenty-year line of cases. Zelman is a death knell for Establishment Clause challenges to carefully …

Aboilishing The Texas Jury Shuffle., Michael M. Gallgher

St. Mary's Law Journal

This Article argues that the Texas Legislature should abolish the jury shuffle and join the other forty-nine states who have already done so. The jury shuffle, when requested, is a procedure which results in a random shuffling of the names of the jury pool members. Texas attorneys currently possess an entirely cost and risk free procedure through which they can discriminate against potential jurors on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, or anything else that suits their fancy. An attorney can request a jury shuffle without stating a reason and a judge cannot ask why a shuffle was requested or …