Law Commons^™

Forced To Bear The Burden And Now The Children: The Dobbs Decision And Environmental Justice Communities, Mia Petrucci

Washington Journal of Social & Environmental Justice

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of The Juggernaut: The Ethical And Constitutional Argument For Prosecutorial Discretion, David A. Lord

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Within days of the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade, progressive prosecutors throughout the country announced that if their jurisdictions enacted restrictions on abortion, they would not prosecute the individuals who had these procedures or the doctors who performed them. This is the latest example of situations, like drug crimes, illegal gun possession, and other offenses, where prosecutors have declined to enforce a state law as a matter of public policy. Critics of this broad use of prosecutorial discretion have argued that it violates the constitutional separation of powers.

This Article argues that prosecutorial discretion is well-founded in American …

Pro-Choice (Of Law): Extraterritorial Application Of State Law Using Abortion As A Case Study, Marnie Leonard

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Madison Underwood was scheduled to receive a life-saving abortion at a clinic in Tennessee when her doctor told her the procedure had been canceled. The Supreme Court had overturned the constitutional right to abortion a few days prior. Although Underwood’s abortion was still legal in Tennessee, her doctor felt performing the procedure was too risky with the law changing so quickly.

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Faith And/In Medicine: Religious And Conscientious Objections To Maid, Daphne Gilbert

Dalhousie Law Journal

Across Canada, health care institutions that operate under the umbrella of religious traditions refuse to offer medical assistance in dying (MAiD) on the grounds that it violates their Charter-protected rights to freedom of religion and conscience. This article analyses the Supreme Court jurisprudence on section 2(a) and concludes that it should not extend to the protection of institutional rights. While the Court has not definitively pronounced a view on this matter, its jurisprudence suggests that any institutional right to freedom of religion would not extend to decisions on publicly-funded and legal health care. MAiD is a constitutionally-protected option for individuals …

The Opioid Crisis: The States' And Local Governments' Response To Bigpharma's Deception And Why The Supremacy Clause May Provide A Cloak For Opioid Manufacturers To Hide Behind, Tracie Childers

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Global Person: Pig-Human Embryos, Personhood, And Precision Medicine, Yvonne Cripps

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

Chimeras, in the form of pig-human embryos engineered by CRISPR-Cas9 and other biotechnologies, have been created as potential sources of organs for transplantation. Against that background, and in an era of "precision medicine," this Article examines the concept of the global genetically modified person and asks whether humanness and personhood are being eroded, or finding new boundaries in intellectual property and constitutional law.

2016-2017 Georgia State University Law Review Symposium: Exploring The Right To Die In The U.S., Margaret Pabst Battin

Georgia State University Law Review

This transcript is a reproduction of the Keynote Presentation at the 2016–2017 Georgia State University Law Review Symposium on November 11, 2016. Margaret Battin, is a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and Adjunct Professor of Internal Medicine at the University of Utah.

Distinctive Factors Affecting The Legal Context Of End-Of-Life Medical Care For Older Persons, Marshall B. Kapp

Georgia State University Law Review

Current legal regulation of medical care for individuals approaching the end of life in the United States is predicated essentially on a factual model emanating from a series of high-profile judicial opinions concerning the rights of adults who become either permanently unconscious or are clearly going to die soon with or without aggressive attempts of curative therapy.

The need for a flexible, adaptable approach to medically treating people approaching the end of their lives, and a similar openness to possible modification of the legal framework within which treatment choices are made and implemented, are particularly important when older individuals are …

The Federal Medical Loss Ratio: A Permissible Federal Regulation Or An Encroachment On State Power?, Meghan S. Stubblebine

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Likely Impact Of National Federation On Commerce Clause Jurisprudence, Robert J. Pushaw Jr., Grant S. Nelson

Pepperdine Law Review

In National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court exhaustively analyzed Congress’s constitutional power to enact the watershed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA or “Obamacare”). The ACA imposes a “shared responsibility requirement,” popularly known as the “Individual Mandate” (IM), which forces Americans to buy medical insurance or pay a “penalty.” The ACA’s text and legislative history, as well as the public defenses of it by President Obama and his supporters, consistently described the IM as a valid exercise of Congress’s power “[t]o regulate Commerce . . . among the several States.” This reliance on the Commerce …

Misappropriating Women’S History In The Law And Politics Of Abortion , Tracy A. Thomas

Seattle University Law Review

To examine the veracity of the political and legal claims of a feminist history against abortion, this Article focuses on one of the leading icons used in antiabortion advocacy—Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Stanton has, quite literally, been the poster child for FFL’s historical campaign against abortion, appearing on posters, flyers, and commemorative coffee mugs. Advocates claim that Stanton is a particularly fitting spokesperson because she was a “feisty gal who had seven children and was outspokenly pro-life.” They claim that she “condemned abortion in the strongest possible terms” and was “a revolutionary who consistently advocated for the rights of women, for …

Toward A Pragmatic Model Of Judicial Decisionmaking: Why Tort Law Provides A Better Framework Than Constitutional Law For Deciding The Issue Of Medical Futility, Brent D. Lloyd

Seattle University Law Review

Recognizing that courts will eventually have to confront the issue of medical futility, this Comment argues that there is no principled basis for omitting these difficult questions from a legal analysis of the issue and that courts should therefore decide the issue in a manner that honestly confronts them. Specifically, the argument advanced here is that courts confronted with cases of medical futility should decide the issue under principles of tort law, rather than under principles of constitutional law. The crux of this argument is that tort principles provide an open-ended analytical framework conducive to considering troublesome questions like those …

Nude Dancing Conveying A Message Or Eroticism And Sexuality Is Protected By The First Amendment But Can Be Limited Under State Police Powers Provided The Government Establishes A Substantial, Content-Neutral Purpose., Fred S. Wilson

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., the Supreme Court held the First Amendment protects nude dancing as conveying an expressive message, but state police powers may limit protection if the government establishes a substantial, content-neutral purpose. It is a principal of constitutional law where an actor intends to convey a message by expressive conduct, the First Amendment protection extends to that expression. Traditionally, time, place, and manner regulations restricting expressive conduct based on either the subject-matter of the message or the viewpoint of the actor receive content-based classification. However, content-based regulation of expressive conduct is constitutional only when narrowly drawn …

A Trial Court's Refusal To Question Prospective Jurors About The Specific Contents Of Pretrial Publicity Which They Had Read Or Heard Did Not Violate A Defendant's Sixth Amendment Right To An Impartial Jury, Or Fourteenth Amendment Right To Due Process., Karen A. Cusenbary

St. Mary's Law Journal

In Mu'Min v. Virginia, the United States Supreme Court held a defendant has no right to ask jurors about the potential influence of prejudicial pretrial publicity. A defendant may ask only if the jurors can remain impartial. The Court mandates that overturning a trial court’s jury selection is allowable only if manifest error renders the trial fundamentally unfair. The Court did not find that the case involved sufficient public passion to necessitate a more extensive jury examination by the trial court to include inquiries involving the effect of pretrial publicity. The ruling in Mu'Min leaves too much discretion to the …