Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Abortion (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Circuit courts (1)
- Discrimination (1)
- Diseases (1)
-
- Drugs (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Gender and law (1)
- Health care (1)
- Judicial interpretation (1)
- Patent law (1)
- Pharmaceuticals (1)
- Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1)
- Precedent (1)
- Pregnancy (1)
- Public health (1)
- Research and development (1)
- Texas (1)
- United States Supreme Court (1)
- Vaccines (1)
- Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt (1)
- Women (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Intellectual Property Of Vaccines: Takeaways From Recent Infectious Disease Outbreaks, Ana Santos Rutschman
The Intellectual Property Of Vaccines: Takeaways From Recent Infectious Disease Outbreaks, Ana Santos Rutschman
Michigan Law Review Online
In late 2019 and early 2020, a new strain of coronavirus, a family of pathogens causing serious respiratory illness, began infecting populations across the globe. A quick uptick in COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel pathogen, prompted the World Health Organization to declare the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020. By mid-February 2020, with 26 countries reporting cases of COVID-19 infection, the global case count had surpassed 50,000, and had resulted in over 1,500 deaths. The World Health Organization elevated the status of the outbreak to a pandemic in mid-March. As of early …
Unduly Burdening Women’S Health: How Lower Courts Are Undermining Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Leah M. Litman
Unduly Burdening Women’S Health: How Lower Courts Are Undermining Whole Woman’S Health V. Hellerstedt, Leah M. Litman
Michigan Law Review Online
At the end of the Supreme Court’s 2016 Term, the Court issued its decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt. One of the more closely watched cases of that Term, Hellerstedt asked whether the Supreme Court would adhere to its prior decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed that women have a constitutionally protected right to decide to end a pregnancy.
The state of Texas had not formally requested that the Court revisit Casey or the earlier decision Casey had affirmed, Roe v. Wade, in Hellerstedt. But that was what Texas was, in effect, asking …