Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Abolition (1)
- Assisted suicide (1)
- Badges and incidents of slavery (1)
- Bioethics (1)
- Civil rights (1)
-
- Civil war (1)
- Congruence and proportionality (1)
- Doctors (1)
- Due Process; Constitutional Law (1)
- Due process (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Equal protection (1)
- Euthanasia (1)
- Fourteenth Amendment (1)
- Generally; Fourteenth Amendment; Legal Practice and Procedure; Common Law; Jurisprudence; Constitutional Rights; Freedom of Religion; Human Rights Law; Religion and the Law (1)
- Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1)
- Marbury (1)
- McCulloch (1)
- Necessary and proper (1)
- Quill v. Vacco (1)
- Race (1)
- Racial profiling (1)
- Right to die (1)
- Slavery (1)
- Suicide (1)
- Terminal illness (1)
- Thirteenth Amendment (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Judicial Review Of Thirteenth Amendment Legislation: 'Congruence And Proportionality' Or 'Necessary And Proper'?, William M. Carter Jr.
Judicial Review Of Thirteenth Amendment Legislation: 'Congruence And Proportionality' Or 'Necessary And Proper'?, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
The Thirteenth Amendment has relatively recently been rediscovered by scholars and litigants as a source of civil rights protections. Most of the scholarship focuses on judicial enforcement of the Amendment in lawsuits brought by individuals. However, scholars have paid relatively little attention as of late to the proper scope of congressional action enforcing the Amendment. The reason, presumably, is that it is fairly well settled that Congress enjoys very broad authority to determine what constitutes either literal slavery or, to use the language of Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co., a "badge or incident of slavery" falling within the Amendment's …
A Measure Of Freedom, James W. Nickel
Making Sausage: The Ninth Circuit's Opinion, Carl E. Schneider
Making Sausage: The Ninth Circuit's Opinion, Carl E. Schneider
Articles
As I write, the Supreme Court has just agreed to hear Compassion in Dying v. Washington and Quill v. Vacco, the two cases in which United States circuit courts of appeals held that a state may not constitutionally prohibit physicians from helping a terminally ill person who wishes to commit suicide to do so. These cases have already received lavish comment and criticism, and no doubt the Supreme Court's opinion will garner even more. Reasonably enough, most of this analysis addresses the merits of physician-assisted suicide as social policy. I, here, want to talk about how setting bioethical policy …