Law Commons^™

Comment, Francesca Procaccini

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Let's start with the antecedent question that both the theme of this conference and all three papers in this session present. That is, before we ask how law schools might better advance the freedom of expression on campus, and even before asking what role law schools play in protecting or suppressing free speech more generally, we must ask the first order question: whether freedom of expression at U.S. law schools is indeed imperiled?

There is an underlying assumption in all three papers that something is amiss, that things are not quite at their optimal, that improve- ment is needed. And …

Confronting Legal And Technological Incongruity: Remote Testimony For Child Witnesses, Elizabeth A. Mulkey

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Child victims are often the only eyewitnesses in cases against their abusers. A child's testimony may be necessary for a prosecutor to secure a conviction. However, the child must often face his or her abuser and relive the traumatic experience while giving this testimony. Any accommodations or protection of a child witness at trial must be balanced against the defendant's rights under the Confrontation Clause. The Supreme Court's decision in Maryland v. Craig allows child victims to testify via one-way, closed-circuit television in some circumstances, but the Court has not addressed two-way, closed-circuit testimony or remote testimony. In the absence …

"Sell's" Conundrums: The Right Of Incompetent Defendants To Refuse Anti-Psychotic Medication, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Sell v. United States declared that situations in which the state is authorized to forcibly medicate a criminal defendant to restore competency to stand trial "may be rare." Experience since Sell indicates that this prediction was wrong. In fact, wittingly or not, Sell created three exceptions to its holding (the dangerousness, treatment incompetency, and serious crime exceptions) that virtually swallow the right to refuse. Using the still-on-going case of Jared Loughner as an illustration, this essay explores the scope of these exceptions and the dispositions available in those rare circumstances when none of them …

Doubts About Daubert: Psychiatric Anecdata As A Case Study, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., the Supreme Court sensibly held that testimony purporting to be scientific is admissible only if it possesses sufficient indicia of scientific validity. In Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, the Court more questionably held that opinion evidence based on "technical" and "specialized" knowledge must meet the same admissibility threshold as scientific testimony. This Article addresses the implications of these two decisions for opinion evidence presented by mental health professionals in criminal trials.

Introduction: Caring For The Nation--Current Issues In Health Care Reform, Susan E. Powley

Vanderbilt Law Review

Health care reform is once again on the "front burner" of American politics. With health care costs in the United States rising at three times the rate of inflation and an increasing portion of the population falling through the cracks of the current health care delivery system,' legislators, health care professionals, and the population at large now have little difficulty agreeing that the system is badly in need of reform. This consensus, however, falls apart when discussion turns to what needs to be fixed and how to fix it. Federal legislators currently have over twenty health bills pending before them, …

The Role Of Mental Health Professionals In The Criminal Process: The Case For Informed Speculation, Christopher Slobogin, Bonnie J. Richard

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In this article we have attempted to make the case for continued participation by appropriately qualified mental health professionals in the adjudication of reconstructive subjective issues of the criminal law. In Part I, we outlined the reasons why imprecision and speculation is and must be tolerated in doctrines of exculpation and mitigation. In Part II, we developed the case for evidentiary rules which permit "informed speculation" by qualified clinical experts so as to enable defendants to explore and present subjective defenses and assist triers of fact to assess the plausibility and significance of such claims. We recognize that many mental …