Law Commons^™

Autonomy And Accountability: Why Informed Consent, Consumer Protection, And Defunding May Beat Conversion Therapy Bans, Melissa Ballengee Alexander

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Medical Evidence And Expertise In Abortion Jurisprudence, Aziza Ahmed

Faculty Scholarship

Medical literature on abortion largely supports pro-choice legal claims. In turn, progressive lawyers often call for “evidence-based approaches” to lawmaking on the assumption that it will produce pro-choice legal and regulatory outcomes. This article argues that the evidence-based approach is no longer a reliable or stable strategy for pro-choice lawyering given transformations in judicial treatment of medical knowledge and a shifting evidentiary base.

Drawing on landmark cases from 1973 to 2012, this article demonstrates how the Supreme Court and lower courts selectively utilize medical expertise and evidence to liberalize or constrain abortion access. With Roe v. Wade, 4 the Supreme …

Religious Toleration And Claims Of Conscience, Kent Greenawalt

Faculty Scholarship

One aspect of the issue of toleration of religion is how far the government and others should recognize religious claims of conscience. Such claims will be present in any liberal democracy. The particular controversies on which attention is mainly focused shift, but certain underlying themes remain.

In this essay, I outline what I take to be the major issues about government recognition of religious claims of conscience. I then address the special problems created when a claim of conscience ends up competing with an opposing claim of conscience or with basic premises about fairness and justice. We can conceive of …

The Relation Of Theories Of Jurisprudence To International Politics And Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

In this essay we shall be concerned with the real world relevance of theories of international law; that is, with the question of the theories themselves as a factor in international decision-making. To do this it is first necessary to review briefly the substance of the jurisprudential debate among legal scholars, then to view some basic jurisprudential ideas as factors in international views of "law," and finally to reach the question of the operative difference a study of these theories might make in world politics.

An Essay On Torts: States Of Argument, Marshall S. Shapo

Faculty Working Papers

This essay summarizes high points in torts scholarship and case law over a period of two generations, highlighting the "states of argument" that have characterized tort law over that period. It intertwines doctrine and policy. Its doctrinal features include the tradtional spectrum of tort liability, the duty question, problems of proof, and the relative incoherency of damages rules. Noting the cross-doctrinal role of tort as a solver of functional problems, it focuses on major issues in products liability and medical malpractice. The essay discusses such elements of policy as the role of power in tort law, the tension between communitarianism …

The Effect Of Legal Theories On Judicial Decisions, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

I draw a distinction in the beginning of this essay between judicial decision-making and a judge's decision-making. To persuade a judge, we should try to discover what her theories are. Across a range of theories, I offered well-known case examples typically cited as examples of each theory. Then I showed that the exact same theory used to justify or explain those case results could be used to justify or explain the opposite result in each of those cases.

The "Bad Samaritan" Paradigm, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

This essay will attempt to show that the disparity between the rule of law and the dictates of morality is itself a product of the paradigmatic way in which the "Bad Samaritan" cases are analyzed. If we examine the cases in an entirely different way, many of the standard problems will dissolve and new alternatives will become apparent. The essay will also show that the "Bad Samaritan" paradigm is part of a larger paradigm linking the law of torts with the criminal law, which also needs to be reexamined. Finally a recommendation for dealing with the "Bad Samaritan" problem legislatively …

Elmer's Rule: A Jurisprudential Dialogue, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Cardozo wrote of Riggs v. Palmer that this case that two analytical paths pointed in different directions and the judges selected the path that seemed better to lead to "justice". Dworkin has claimed that the case demonstrates the triumph of certain "principles" over what are called "rules of law". Taylor has argued that there was no "law" at all about murderers inheriting from testators before the actual decision in Riggs, and that consequently the decision itself was the only "law" that affected Elmer. All of these suggest that the decision in Riggs was largely unpredictable and therefore must have come …

Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation Settlements: Implications For Competition And Innovation, John R. Thomas

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Although brand-name pharmaceutical companies routinely procure patents on their innovative medications, such rights are not self-enforcing. Brand-name firms that wish to enforce their patents against generic competitors must commence litigation in the federal courts. Such litigation ordinarily terminates in either a judgment of infringement, which typically blocks generic competition until such time as the patent expires, or a judgment that the patent is invalid or not infringed, which typically opens the market to generic entry. As with other sorts of commercial litigation, however, the parties to pharmaceutical patent litigation may choose to settle their case. Certain of these settlements have …

Contested Morality: Judge Posner On Infanticide, Slavery, Suttee, Female Genital Mutilation, And The Holocaust, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Judge Richard Posner locates his moral theory between moral absolutism and the "anything goes" kind of moral relativism. He analyzes whether five contested topics are subject to useful moral debate: infanticide, slavery, suttee, female genital mutilation, and the Holocaust. Each topic presents a different perspective on his own moral theory. But each one fails in a different way to place his own moral theory on a sound footing.

A New (And Better) Interpretation Of Holmes's Prediction Theory Of Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Holmes's famous 1897 theory that law is a prediction of what courts will do in fact slowly changed the way law schools taught law until, by the mid-1920s legal realism took over the curriculum. The legal realists argued that judges decide cases on all kinds of objective and subjective reasons including precedents. If law schools wanted to train future lawyers to be effective, they should be exposed to collateral subjects that might influence judges: law and society, law and literature, and so forth. But the standard interpretation has been a huge mistake. It treats law as analogous to weather forecasting: …

Health Courts?, Philip G. Peters Jr.

Faculty Publications

This article undertakes the first detailed critique of the proposal from Common Good and the Harvard School of Public Health to replace medical malpractice jury trials with adjudication before specialized health courts. Professor Peters concludes that the modest benefits likely to be produced by the current health court proposal are matched by the risks of bias and overreaching that these courts would also present. Missing from the plan is the doctrinal change mostly likely to improve patient safety - hospital enterprise liability. Without enterprise liability, the health court proposal is unlikely to achieve its patient safety goals and, as a …

Comparative And International Health Law, Timothy Stoltzfus Jost

Scholarly Articles

No abstract provided.

The Role Of Courts In Health Care Rationing: The German Model, Timothy Stoltzfus Jost

Scholarly Articles

Virtually every country in the world is currently attempting to find ways to ration health care services in order to control exploding health care costs. In some countries the courts play a role in overseeing the rationing of health care. This article examines the role that the courts play in the United States in health care rationing in various contexts and programs. It then goes on to present the German social courts as an alternative model for judicial oversight of health care rationing that is both responsive to the rights of health care consumers and professionals and sensitive to the …

Private Or Public Approaches To Insuring The Uninsured: Lessons From International Experience With Private Insurance, Timothy Stoltzfus Jost

Scholarly Articles

In the recent past a broad consensus has emerged in the United States that the best way to expand coverage of the uninsured is to use tax subsidies to encourage the purchase of private health insurance policies. Many advocates of this approach also call for replacing employment-related group policies with individual policies, and for minimizing regulation of private insurance. Those who advocate these policies, however, have rarely considered the experience that other nations have had with private health insurance.

In fact most other countries have private insurance markets, and in many countries private insurance plays a significant role in financing …

Bajakajian: New Hope For Escaping Excessive Fines Under The Civil False Claims Act, Melissa Ballengee Alexander

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Trade And Health: The Global Spread Of Diseases And International Trade, David P. Fidler

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Moral Dilemma Of Positivism, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

I think there has been an advance in positivist thinking, and that advance consists of the recognition by MacCormick, a positivist, that positivism needs to be justified morally (and not just as an apparent scientific and objective fact about legal systems). But the justification that is required cannot consist in labelling "sovereignty of conscience" as a moral principle, nor in compounding the confusion by claiming that positivism minimally and hence necessarily promotes sovereignty of conscience. We need, from the positivists, a more logical and coherent argument than that. Until one comes along, I continue to believe that positivists inherently have …

The Supreme Court, The Mentally Disabled Criminal Defendant, And Symbolic Values: Random Decisions, Hidden Rationales, Or Doctrinal Abyss, Michael L. Perlin

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Whither Jurisprudence?, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

After considering the side road of critical legal studies, I shall try to indicate the major signposts to a more complete jurisprudence. These signposts take the form of questions or anomalies in our present understanding of law. I will conclude that only by following these signposts, by exploring these questions and anomalies, will we begin to uncover the nature of law and justice.

What 'Counts' As Law?, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

A reader of jurisprudence might conclude that only philosophers raise the question whether international law may be said to exist or is really law. But in terms of frequency, the question is probably raised more often by governments and states that are not trying to be philosophical. The increasing attention being paid to the need for, and the procedures for, objective validation of rules of international law in a burgeoning literature of international law evidences the seriousness of the problem, the responsibility of scholars for careful scholarship in this area of legal theory, and ultimately the good possibility of generally …

Lon Fuller And Substantive Natural Law, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

I will contend that Fuller's secular or "procedural" natural law, as described by Moffat, does not cover the theoretical position that could be occupied by a substantive natural lawyer, that such a theoretical position is viable today, and that there are some key elements in Fuller's theory that actually conflict with substantive natural law and might therefore be criticized from that perspective.

Disqualification Of Counsel: The Westinghouse Litigation, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

The motion to disqualify counsel is becoming increasingly important in pre-trial strategy. Discusses one case arising out of Westinghouse Electric Corporation's alleged breach of long­term uranium supply contracts, in which a disqualification motion was sustained against Westinghouse's counsel, Kirkland & Ellis.

Can/Should Computers Replace Judges?, Anthony D'Amato

Faculty Working Papers

Speculates concerning judicial decision-making to test, at least theoretically, what some of the implications of jurisprudential advances might be. Proposes as the means of making this test a consideration of whether a computer may be so programmed as to replace the judicial function of judges.

The Teaching Of Legal Medicine, H. M. Taylor, John S. Bradway

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.