Law Commons^™

Unwell: Indiana V. Edwards And The Fate Of Mentally Ill Pro Se Defendants, John H. Blume, Morgan J. Clark

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Kendra’S Law And The Rights Of The Mentally Ill: An Empirical Peek Behind The Courts’ Legal Analysis And A Suggested Template For The New York State Legislature’S Reconsideration For Renewal In 2010, Kathryn A. Worthington

Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy

No abstract provided.

Insane Fear: The Discriminatory Category Of "Mentally Ill And Dangerous", Sherry F. Colb

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article considers the constitutional and moral implications of the distinction the law draws between different classes of dangerous people, depending upon their status as mentally ill or mentally well. Those who are mentally well benefit from the right to freedom from incarceration unless and until they commit a crime. By contrast, dangerous people who are mentally ill are subject to potentially indefinite "civil" preemptive confinement.

In a relatively recent case, Kansas v. Hendricks, the United States Supreme Court upheld the post-prison civil confinement of Leroy Hendricks, a man who had served prison time after pleading guilty to child molestation. …

Ulysses In Minnesota: First Steps Toward A Self-Binding Psychiatric Advance Directive Statute , Roberto Cuca

Cornell Law Review

No abstract provided.