Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Book Review: We The People: The Fourteenth Amendment And The Supreme Court, S. I. Strong
Book Review: We The People: The Fourteenth Amendment And The Supreme Court, S. I. Strong
Faculty Publications
Never one to shirk a challenge, Michael Perry has taken on the difficult task of investigating whether, as charged by a number of prominent social and legal commentators, "the modern Supreme Court, in the name of the Fourteenth Amendment [to the US Constitution], [has] usurped prerogatives and made choices that properly belong to the electorally accountable representatives of the American people," and if so, to what extent (p. 8). Perry makes no attempt to address every facet of Fourteenth Amendment doctrine, but instead focuses his discussion on some of the most controversial topics: racial segregation, affirmative action, discrimination on the …
Health Care Law: Breaking Down The Boundaries Of Malpractice Law, Philip G. Peters Jr.
Health Care Law: Breaking Down The Boundaries Of Malpractice Law, Philip G. Peters Jr.
Faculty Publications
Historically, courts have treated professional malpractice cases as unique. When disputes that would otherwise have been governed by tort rules of general application have arisen in the context of medical treatment, courts have routinely constructed special rules for the resolution of those disputes. Recent evidence suggests that this penchant for special rules may be weakening and that malpractice law may be slowly melting back into the sea of tort doctrine.The three Missouri health care law cases noted in this issue are the latest evidence that courts today are more willing to resolve medical negligence actions using tort rules of general …
Bringing Structure To The Law Of Injunctions Against Expression, Christina E. Wells
Bringing Structure To The Law Of Injunctions Against Expression, Christina E. Wells
Faculty Publications
Part I of this Article reviews the Court's cases regarding injunctions against speech, focusing first on the increasing elevation of rhetoric (as opposed to analysis) in the Court's prior restraint decisions. Part I also reviews the Court's other decisions involving injunctions and demonstrates that they too contain little, if any, analysis concerning the appropriateness of injunctive relief against expression. Part II examines Madsen's interaction with the Court's previous decisions and discusses how Madsen furthers the incoherence of the Court's previous cases. Part III explains that content discrimination principles, although superficially attractive, are inappropriate with injunctive relief because the content-based/content-neutral distinction's …