United States' courts have played a limited, yet key, role in shaping health equity in three areas of law: racial discrimination, disability discrimination, and constitutional rights. Executive and administrative action has been much more instrumental than judicial decisions in advancing racial equality in health care. Courts have been reluctant to intervene on racial justice because overt disc...

The role of remorse in judicial decisions in the criminal justice system has been addressed in scholarship and remains controversial. The purpose of this qualitative research was to examine the views of sitting criminal judges on remorse, its assessment, and its relevance in their decision-making. After approval of the study design by the institutional review board, 23 judges were interviewed i...

introduction: to draw a general picture of the current iranian-law and shiah fiqh position as to the assisted reproduction: -whether allowed or not, - and, to show how and what changes could occur in this field. materials and methods: examination of the iranian legislation and judicial decisions, consideration of jurisprudential verdicts of the eminent shiah jurists and interpretation of the or...

At the intersection of behavioral and institutional studies of policy-making lie a series of questions about how elite choices affect mass public opinion. Scholars have considered how judicial decisions—especially US Supreme Court decisions—affect individuals’ support for specific policy positions. These studies yield a series of competing findings. Whereas past research uses opinion surveys to...

During the last ten years, forensic psychiatry has witnessed a sharp inversion of one of its most thorny problems from the "right to receive treatment" to the "right to refuse treatment." Judicial decisions such as Rogers I in Massachusetts and Rennii in New Jersey have created clinical dilemmas for mental health professionals; the courts' recognition of the psychiatric patient's right, albeit ...

Effective judicial review of administrative determinations depends on both legislative direction and judicial discretion. The review processes of state appellate courts, unlike their federal counterparts, have only infrequently been intensely scrutinized. In a small effort to fill this gap, this Note will analyze, as an example, the Pennsylvania judiciary's review of the Pennsylvania Liquor Con...

Progressive reformers envisioned a therapeutic juvenile court that made individualized treatment decisions in the child's "best interests." The Supreme Court's Gault decision provided the impetus for transforming the juvenile court from an informal welfare agency into a scaled-down criminal court. Since Gault, the juvenile court procedures increasingly resemble those of adult courts, although i...

The precautionary principle was formulated to provide a basis for political action to protect the environment from potentially severe or irreversible harm in circumstances of scientific uncertainty that prevent a full risk or cost-benefit analysis. It underpins environmental law in the European Union and has been extended to include public health and consumer safety. The aim of this study was t...