Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Censorship On The Internet: Who Should Make The Rules, Joe Zopolsky
Censorship On The Internet: Who Should Make The Rules, Joe Zopolsky
Oklahoma Journal of Law and Technology
No abstract provided.
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared A. Goldstein's Blog: Ri's Conversion Therapy Ban Protects Lgbtq Youth And It's Constitutional 08-09-2017, Jared A. Goldstein
Rwu First Amendment Blog: Jared A. Goldstein's Blog: Ri's Conversion Therapy Ban Protects Lgbtq Youth And It's Constitutional 08-09-2017, Jared A. Goldstein
Law School Blogs
No abstract provided.
Constitutional Law—Why Amending The Consitution To Overrule Citizens United Is The Wrong Way To Fix Campaign Finance In The United States, Zachary Hale
University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review
No abstract provided.
Reforming State Laws On How Businesses Can Ban Guns: "No Guns" Signs, Property Rights, And The First Amendment, Christine M. Quinn
Reforming State Laws On How Businesses Can Ban Guns: "No Guns" Signs, Property Rights, And The First Amendment, Christine M. Quinn
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Every state has different regulations regarding how businesses can ban guns. Some states mandate that specific signs be posted in specific places while other states say nothing on the issue. This Note first establishes that even under Heller and McDonald, private business owners have a right to control their private property, which includes a right to prohibit their customers from carrying firearms into their buildings. It then introduces some states’ requirements for “No Guns” signs and examines their weaknesses, particularly from a First Amendment, compelled speech perspective. The Note concludes that some current state regulations are ineffective, unclear, and outright …
Science As Speech, Natalie Ram
Science As Speech, Natalie Ram
All Faculty Scholarship
In April 2015, researchers in China reported the successful genetic editing of human embryos using a new technology that promised to make gene editing easier and more effective than ever before. In the United States, the announcement drew immediate calls to regulate or prohibit
outright any use of this technology to alter human embryos, even for purely research purposes. The fervent response to the Chinese announcement was, in one respect, unexceptional. Proposals to regulate or prohibit scientific research following a new breakthrough occur with substantial frequency. Innovations in cloning technology and embryonic stem cell research have prompted similar outcries, and …
Tip Of The Iceberg Ii: How The Intended-Uses Principle Produces Medical Knowledge And Protects Liberty, Christopher Robertson
Tip Of The Iceberg Ii: How The Intended-Uses Principle Produces Medical Knowledge And Protects Liberty, Christopher Robertson
Faculty Scholarship
In recent years, the Food and Drug Administration’s pre-market approval process has come under increasing scrutiny as an infringement on liberty and a regulation of speech. In the first part of this symposium contribution, we offer a case study of Seroquel XR, showing how the FDA’s premarket approval process – and the restrictions on “off-label” promotion in particular – caused the drug company to produce and disseminate knowledge about safety and efficacy for new uses. The law successfully resolved the collective action problem of producing knowledge, even while the law protected the liberty of individual doctors and patients to use …
The Tip Of The Iceberg: A First Amendment Right To Promote Drugs Off-Label, Christopher Robertson
The Tip Of The Iceberg: A First Amendment Right To Promote Drugs Off-Label, Christopher Robertson
Faculty Scholarship
Scholars, advocates, and courts have begun to recognize a First Amendment right for the makers of drugs and medical devices to promote their products “off-label,” without proving safety and efficacy of new intended uses. Yet, so far, this debate has occurred in a vacuum of peculiar cases, where convoluted commercial speech doctrine underdetermines the outcome. Juxtaposing these cases against other routine prosecutions of those who peddle unapproved drugs reveals the common legal regime at issue. Review of the seven arguments deployed in the off-label domain finds that, if they were valid, they would undermine the FDA’s entire premarket approval regime. …