Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Roe v. Wade (2)
- Alaska Packers Ass'n v. Industrial Accident Commission (1)
- Allstate Insurance Co. v. Hague (1)
- Beal v. Doe (1)
- Board of Education v. Pico (1)
-
- Bradford Electric Co. v. Clapper (1)
- Brady v. United States (1)
- Carroll v. Lanza (1)
- City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health Inc. (1)
- Clay v. Sun Insurance Office (1)
- Coppola v. Commonwealth (1)
- Custody of a Minor (1)
- Detweiler v. Commonwealth (1)
- Doe v. Bolton (1)
- Eisenstadt v. Baird (1)
- Fay v. Noia (1)
- Furman v. Georgia (1)
- Gary-Northwest Indiana Women's Services v. Bowen (1)
- Gilmore v. Utah (1)
- Godfrey v. Georgia (1)
- Gregg v. Georgia (1)
- Griswold v. Connecticut (1)
- Harris v. McRae (1)
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Delta & Pine Land Co (1)
- Home Insurance Co. v. Dick (1)
- Hubbard v. John Tyler Community College (1)
- ICU (1)
- In re Dinnerstein (1)
- In re Quinlan (1)
- Intensive Care Unit (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Academic Discretion And The Constitution: The Fundamentals For Public Higher Education, Paul J. Forch
Academic Discretion And The Constitution: The Fundamentals For Public Higher Education, Paul J. Forch
University of Richmond Law Review
Public institutions of higher education, their faculty, administra- tors, and board members have proven to be a fertile source for the civil rights litigator in the development of constitutional rights. Not surprisingly, education law reporters and journals are reporting increasing numbers of case decisions in the context of higher education. Yet, many educators suffer the mistaken notion that academic judgment is outside the scope of judicial review. While some judicial deference is given to academic discretion, it is by no means conclusive in the face of a constitutional challenge.
The Virginia Natural Death Act - A Critical Analysis, Janice G. Murphy
The Virginia Natural Death Act - A Critical Analysis, Janice G. Murphy
University of Richmond Law Review
The right to die with dignity is a controversial issue. In the absence of legislative guidance, court intervention is often necessary to protect a patient's right to the privacy of his own body. At the same time, courts must protect the state's interests in the preservation of life, the protection of innocent third parties, the prevention of suicide, and the ethical integrity of the medical profession.
The 1983 Abortion Decisions: Clarification Of The Permissible Limits Of Abortion Regulation, Laura Fox
The 1983 Abortion Decisions: Clarification Of The Permissible Limits Of Abortion Regulation, Laura Fox
University of Richmond Law Review
On June 15, 1983, the United States Supreme Court once again addressed the abortion issue, handing down its decisions in City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc., Planned Parenthood Ass'n v. Ashcroft, and Simopoulos v. Virginia. The 1983 Abortion Decisions were an unequivocal reaffirmation of Roe v. Wade and the principle that a woman has a fundamental right to an abortion. On a higher level of analysis, these decisions are significant because they clarify how the Roe doctrine applies to procedural restrictions on abortion.
The Impact Of Allstate Insurance Co. V. Hague On Constitutional Limitations On Choice Of Law, W. Clark Williams Jr.
The Impact Of Allstate Insurance Co. V. Hague On Constitutional Limitations On Choice Of Law, W. Clark Williams Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
The development of constitutional limitations on choice of law by the United States Supreme Court has turned primarily on the due process clause and the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution. In theory at least, each constitutional provision rests upon separate grounds. The full faith and credit clause, as it applies to public acts, would compel a forum state under appropriate circumstances to honor the sovereignty of a foreign state in the federal system and to apply the law of the foreign state whose interests are sufficiently compelling. The due process clause limits the power of …
Questions Surrounding Virginia's Death Penalty, James T. Lloyd Jr.
Questions Surrounding Virginia's Death Penalty, James T. Lloyd Jr.
University of Richmond Law Review
On August 10, 1982, Frank J. Coppola died in Virginia's electric chair. His was the fifth execution since the 1976 Supreme Court decision holding that a punishment of death was not unconstitutional per se. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, Coppola's was the first execution in over a decade.