When I am invited to participate in conferences on the "right to die," I suspect that the organizers of such gatherings expect me to fill what might be called the " 'slippery slope' slot" on the program or, more generally, to articulate the "conservative" position on this controversial matter. These expectations are hardly surprising. The "right to die" is a euphemism for what almost everybody used to call a form of euthanasia-" passive" or "negative" or "indirect" euthanasia-and some thirty years ago, in the course of raising various objections to proposed euthanasia legislation, I advanced the "thin edge of the …

Go to article

To Tell What We Know Or Wait For Godot?, Phoebe C. Ellsworth Jan 1991

To Tell What We Know Or Wait For Godot?, Phoebe C. Ellsworth

Articles

Professor Elliott raises two questions about the American Psychological Association's practice of submitting amicus briefs to the courts. First, are our data sufficiently valid, consistent, and generalizable to be applicable to the real world issues? Second, are amicus briefs adequate to communicate scientific findings? The first of these is not a general question, but must be addressed anew each time the Association considers a new issue. An evaluation of the quality and sufficiency of scientific knowledge about racial discrimination, for example, tells us nothing at all about the quality and sufficiency of scientific knowledge about sexual abuse. "Are the data …

Go to article

Ex Proprio Vigore, James J. White Jan 1991

Ex Proprio Vigore, James J. White

Articles

The National Conference of the Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) is a legislature in every way but one. It drafts uniform acts, debates them, passes them, and promulgates them, but that passage and promulgation do not make these uniform acts law over any citizen of any state. These acts become the law of the various states only ex proprio vigore - only if their own vitality influences the legislators of the various states to pass them.

Go to article

Compounding Confusion And Hampering Diversity: Life After Finley And The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Richard D. Freer Jan 1991

Compounding Confusion And Hampering Diversity: Life After Finley And The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Richard D. Freer

Faculty Articles

It has been a tough couple of years for supplemental jurisdiction. In recent decades, the doctrine, which earlier had been called the "child of necessity and sire of confusion," had become somewhat less confusing. The Supreme Court created a flurry of concern over the future of the doctrine with a pair of restrictive decisions in the late 1970s, but showed no further interest; the lower courts generally interpreted those holdings narrowly. With exceptions in a couple of areas, the application of supplemental jurisdiction in the various joinder situations became relatively clear and predictable, and the doctrine played a major role …

Go to article

Grasping At Burnt Straws: The Disaster Of The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Thomas C. Arthur, Richard Freer Jan 1991

Grasping At Burnt Straws: The Disaster Of The Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute, Thomas C. Arthur, Richard Freer

Faculty Articles

Ah, the strawman model! Where would Professors Rowe, Burbank, and Mengler be without it? At a minimum, they would have a much shorter article. If Professor Freer in fact torched the entire farm, it is because there was so much dry straw lying around after the three drafters finished tilting with the strawmen they created in their response to Professor Freer's article. The drafters spend more than half of their article arguing the irrelevant points that a statute was needed after Finley, that the statute was consistent with recommendations of the Federal Courts Study Committee, and that Professor Freer …

Go to article

"I Vote This Way Because I'M Wrong": The Supreme Court Justice As Epimenides, John M. Rogers Jan 1991