Supreme Court Rulings Research Articles

An assault upon women: reproductive rights in the US in the shadow of the 2022 US Supreme Court Ruling (the Dobbs ruling).

An assault upon women: reproductive rights in the US in the shadow of the 2022 US Supreme Court Ruling (the Dobbs ruling).

Effects of selection regimes on state supreme court opinion writing

AbstractBackgroundJudicial reformers have long debated the merits of different types of judicial selection methods.ObjectivesWhile many of the debates center on how selection methods impact decision making, I argue that selection methods may also affect how justices approach opinion writing.MethodsUsing opinion data from 1953 to 2014 in 21 states and opinion data from 1953 to 2019 in five states, this article investigates whether selection methods influence the clarity of the opinions.ResultsThe results show that selection methods do not have a substantive impact on opinion clarity. What does have an effect on opinion clarity is when justices are ideologically distant from their constituents. Opinion clarity increases when nonpartisan justices are ideologically distant from their constituents, indicating that justices may use written opinions to demonstrate support for public opinion on specific issues, even if they do not generally vote in line with public opinion. In contrast, opinions in states that changed from partisan to nonpartisan are less clear, indicating that when a court changes its selection method, opinion authors may purposefully obfuscate their views and rely on their incumbency advantage to hold on to power.ConclusionThe findings suggest that judicial selection methods only influence opinion clarity in certain contexts.

APA Speaks Out Against Supreme Court Ruling on Affirmative Action in Higher Education

APA Speaks Out Against Supreme Court Ruling on Affirmative Action in Higher Education

The Supreme Court’s Rulings on Race Neutrality Threaten Progress in Medicine and Health

This Viewpoint examines the recent Supreme Court rulings on race neutrality, striking down affirmative action programs in higher education, which will affect efforts to eliminate health inequities in the US.

Potential Effects of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health on Civil Commitment Law.

Since the publication of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health in June of 2022, much attention has been paid to the direct effects of that decision on reproductive health care for pregnant or potentially pregnant individuals; and to the potential effects of the Court's approach in Dobbs to other established precedent related to privacy and autonomy, such as rights to contraception and marriage equality.This Article will explore another potential negative consequence of Dobbs; its potential effect on the constitutional parameters of the law of civil commitment and involuntary medication of the mentally ill.The foundational Supreme Court case establishing the parameters of the State's right to involuntarily commit an individual to a mental institution was decided only two years after Roe v. Wade.In 1975, the Supreme Court in O'Connor v Donaldson held that an individual has a liberty interest in "prefer[ring] one's home to the comforts of an institution," and that a State could not, "without more," confine a non-dangerous individual.The two-prong test of requiring a showing of both mental illness and dangerousness to one's self or to others has remained the cornerstone of civil commitment law ever since.The language and analysis of O'Connor is similar to that of Roe, the abortion rights case overturned by Dobbs.In particular, the grounding of the right to avoid civil commitment in the individual liberty and privacy interests are common themes in the two cases.The current Court, in its decision in Dobbs, has cast substantial doubt on the continued vitality of that analysis; and one can easily imagine a reconceptualization of O'Connor along the lines of Dobbs that substantially alters the requirements for civil commitment. In particular, the reliance in Dobbs and other recent Supreme Court opinions on historical precedent as a linchpin of originalist analysis could lead the Court to search for justifications in colonial or 19th-century mental health practices, time periods which predate modern psychiatric science.This Article will explore the parallels in approach between Roe and O'Connor, and will suggest ways in which the post-Dobbs Supreme Court majority might disrupt the civil commitment status quo, including potential expansion of civil commitment or other detention of pregnant individuals for the protection of the fetus; and possible relaxation of the dangerousness requirement for civil commitment articulated in O'Connor.

Race should not be used as factor in university admissions, US Supreme Court rules

Race should not be used as factor in university admissions, US Supreme Court rules

건설도급계약에 있어서 수급인의 보수청구권에 관한 소고

The nature of construction subcontracting contracts is similar to that of subcontracting agreements, whereby the contractor assumes the obligation to pay compensation to the subcontractor as consideration for the completion of the contracted work. In construction subcontracting contracts, the fulfillment of the subcontractor’s compensation claim rights depends on the determination of “completion of work” established by the Supreme Court. The essential issue in interpreting the concept of “completion of work,” which serves as a fundamental indicator of subcontracting contracts, arises in relation to the fulfillment of the subcontractor’s compensation claim rights. The underlying cause of this issue lies in the explicit provisions of our Civil Code, which stipulate that the subcontractor is solely obligated to complete the work, while the contractor is only required to pay compensation for the completed work. Consequently, disputes arise regarding the point at which the obligation to pay compensation arises for the contractor. Therefore, this study aims to examine the meaning of the subcontractor’s compensation claim rights and the significance of “completion of work” as the essential indicator in subcontracting contracts. To achieve this, we review scholarly opinions on the meaning of the subcontractor’s compensation claim rights and the period of claim fulfillment, and examine the criteria established by domestic Supreme Court rulings, with the objective of identifying issues and proposing alternatives.

Laws of Succession Ordinances by the Religious Leadership of Sephardi and Moroccan Jewish Communities and Their Economic, Social and Gender Implications

This paper discusses the innovativeness of the Inheritance Ordinance introduced in Toledo during the 12th century and later reintroduced in Fez in Morocco following the expulsion of Jewish communities from Spain and Portugal. Community leaders in Toledo, and after the expulsion also in Fes, transformed the laws of succession established in biblical times by granting women equal rights on matters of inheritance by marriage. The ordinance also granted unmarried daughters the right to inherit alongside their brothers despite the fact that, according to biblical law, daughters do not inherit when there are sons. Inheritance ordinances had significant social, financial and gendered implications on Jewish lives in many communities. The study will show that leaders of Sephardi Jewish communities were nothing less than advanced in their innovative and unprecedented ordinances related to women’s inheritance. Their innovativeness followed a number of preliminary conditions which enabled it. First and foremost was the authority vested in these Jewish leaders by the monarchy in various parts of Spain and Portugal. The laws of the kingdom in these countries granted women equal rights in succession laws. So as to avoid significant differences and reduce legislative gaps, ordinances were issued to correspond with national realities. Spain had been the world’s center of Jewish Halacha following the period of the Geonim—the heads of the ancient Talmudic academies of Babylonia and its sages—, and the Sephardic sages felt that their position allowed them to make bold decisions. The most innovative Jewish ordinance issued in this regard back in the 12th century was the Tulitula ordinance, originating from the city of Toledo, home to one of the largest and most affluent Jewish communities of the time. The regulation granted wives rights over their husbands’ inheritance regarding property established during their joint lives, as well as property which she had brought with her to the marriage. Following the Expulsion of Jews from Spain, the expelled sages, arriving in Morocco, reinstated the Tulitula ordinance in the newly established community of the city of Fez, further improving women’s position beyond the provisions of the original regulation. The new circumstances following the expulsion resulted in many Jewish communities in Morocco adopting the new version of the regulation. As they had been forced to wander from place to place, the expelled communities encountered severe problems involving family law. The ordinances spread throughout nearly all Jewish communities in Morocco. In the 19th century, a number of changes were introduced to the Fez ordinances, which in practice diminished women’s inheritance rights. However, the essence of the original ordinance was ultimately assimilated into Rabbinical and Supreme Court rulings of the State of Israel, due to its suitability to Israel’s modern inheritance laws and to the legislation of the Women’s Equal Rights Law in 1951. The leadership of Spanish sages and community leaders in various countries and of rabbinical judges in Fez, Morocco, had been both charismatic and rational and included modern components for coping with social change and new realities under the Kingdoms of Spain as well as following the expulsion.

Projected Health Outcomes Associated With 3 US Supreme Court Decisions in 2022 on COVID-19 Workplace Protections, Handgun-Carry Restrictions, and Abortion Rights

Several recent US Supreme Court rulings have drawn criticism from the medical community, but their health consequences have not been quantitatively evaluated. To model health outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022 that invalidated workplace COVID-19 vaccine or mask-and-test requirements, voided state handgun-carry restrictions, and revoked the constitutional right to abortion. This decision analytical modeling study estimated outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022: (1) National Federation of Independent Business v Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which invalidated COVID-19 workplace protections; (2) New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc v Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police (Bruen), which voided state laws restricting handgun carry; and (3) Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs), which revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2022, to April 7, 2023. For the OSHA ruling, multiple data sources were used to calculate deaths attributable to COVID-19 among unvaccinated workers from January 4 to May 28, 2022, and the share of these deaths that would have been prevented by the voided protections. To model the Bruen decision, published estimates of the consequences of right-to-carry laws were applied to 2020 firearm-related deaths (and injuries) in 7 affected jurisdictions. For the Dobbs ruling, the model assessed unwanted pregnancy continuations, resulting from the change in distance to the closest abortion facility, and then excess deaths (and peripartum complications) from forcing these unwanted pregnancies to term. The decision model projected that the OSHA decision was associated with 1402 additional COVID-19 deaths (and 22 830 hospitalizations) in early 2022. In addition, the model projected that 152 additional firearm-related deaths (and 377 nonfatal injuries) annually will result from the Bruen decision. Finally, the model projected that 30 440 fewer abortions will occur annually due to current abortion bans stemming from Dobbs, with 76 612 fewer abortions if states at high risk for such bans also were to ban the procedure; these bans will be associated with an estimated 6 to 15 additional pregnancy-related deaths each year, respectively, and hundreds of additional cases of peripartum morbidity. These findings suggest that outcomes from 3 Supreme Court decisions in 2022 could lead to substantial harms to public health, including nearly 3000 excess deaths (and possibly many more) over a decade.

The effect of medicaid expansion on access to healthcare, health behaviors and health outcomes between expansion and non-expansion states

In 1965, Medicaid was implemented with the goal of providing insurance to low-income individuals. In 2010, the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) standardized and expanded the eligibility criteria for the Medicaid program across the United States. In 2012, the constitutionality of this expansion was challenged and the Supreme Court rules that states were only required to expand their Medicaid program if they wanted to utilize the additional funds allotted by the federal government. This research paper examines the effects of the expansion by looking at health data in expansion and non-expansion states. Specifically, this study compares metrics designed to gauge healthcare access, health behaviors and health outcomes to determine if expansion has had positive overall effect on expansion states. We conclude that expansion states have demonstrated improved access to healthcare and improved health outcomes than the non-expansion states. Changes in health behaviors reflect mixed results – HIV screenings are higher in expansion states but participation in flu vaccinations show no statistical significance difference between the two groups. Given the results of this analysis, we conclude that Medicaid expansion is an effective policy for states to pursue in order to further the original objectives of Medicaid by improving the health of low-income recipients.

An Analysis of Selected Supreme Court Rulings on Human Rights Violation in Nigeria

Communication gaps between members of the legal profession and people outside the profession still leave a lot to be explained. This study investigates the technicality of written legal documents by studying 10 Nigerian Supreme Court rulings, specifically the outcome of cases of human rights violations by the Nigerian military regime. Nine purposively selected excerpts were analysed using generic structure potential elements. The analysis generated nine elements, five of which are obligatory and the other four optional. The obligatory elements are Review of Lower Court Proceedings, Reproduction of Issues, Reference to Authorities, Application of Authorities, and Final Verdict. The optional elements are Review of Facts, Reproduction of Pleadings, Analysis of Evidence, and Analysis of Argument. This study concludes that generic structure potential is a useful theory for demystifying complex texts.

EKSEKUSI PUTUSAN PENGADILAN AGAMA YANG BELUM INKRACHT BERKENAAN DENGAN HAK ASUH ANAK

Law Number 23 of 2002 concerning Child Protection emphasizes that in the event of separation due to divorce and other situations without eliminating the child's relationship with his parents, the child still has the right to meet and have permanent personal contact with both parents. However, the situation that occurs in society and the existence of a legal vacuum shows that often children cannot meet their parents who have been appointed as custodians because the divorce case decision has not yet become legally binding. This normative juridical research uses statutory approach and the conceptual approach. The concept of child protection regulated in the Child Protection Act and other laws and regulations also includes the protection of children in situations of parental household conflict and protection in situations where the legal process against parental household conflicts is still ongoing and has no permanent legal force. The researcher recommends a change to the Law on Religious Courts. In this case, it is necessary to add legal norms that stipulate those children must be handed over to parents who are holders of custody since the court decision is pronounced, or the issuance of a Supreme Court Rule as the legal basis for implementing execution.

The Development of Procedural Law Through the E-Court System After Pandemic in Indonesia

Technological developments and Covid 19 Pandemic "forced" the Supreme Court (MA) to make breakthrough in procedural law, namely by launching E-Court application, through MA rules Number 3 of 2018 which was exchanged for rules Number 1 of 2019 concerning Case Administration and Trial in E-Courts. E-Court is instrument in court for service of case registration depositing case money to court summons and trial and online delivery of court documents. This study aims to analyze and provide an overview to public of breakthroughs made by the MA for Development of Procedural Law through e-court system. Research method used qualitative research, normative juridical approach. The development of procedural law was initially only intended for registration and examination of civil cases through Supreme Court rules (Perma) No. 3 of 2018 was replaced with Perma No. 1 of 2019 concerning Case Administration and Trial in Electronic Courts. But then e-court is not only for civil cases, it’s also to adjudicate criminal cases with issuance of MA regarding the online criminal trial file Number 4 of 2020. The application for electronic proceedings is an attempt by the Supreme Court to eliminate the obstacles commonly experienced by the judiciary, namely the lack of speed in resolving cases, the difficulty of obtaining data from the court, and the credibility of the integrity of the judiciary, especially judges

Systematic violations of patients’ rights and safety: forced medication of a cohort of 30 patients in Alaska

ABSTRACT Background Psychiatric patients’ human rights are often violated when forced treatment orders are issued. Methods We assessed the records for 30 consecutive petitions for mental health commitment in which an involuntary medication order was requested, from Anchorage, Alaska. Results In 29 cases, the commitment petition was granted. The forced medication order was granted in 27 of the 30 cases. In 26 cases, in violation of previous Supreme Court rulings, the patients’ desires, fears, wishes and experiences were ignored even when the patients were afraid that the neuroleptics might kill them or when they had experienced serious harms such as tardive dyskinesia. The ethical and legal imperative of offering a less intrusive treatment was also ignored. Benzodiazepines were not offered. Psychotherapy was not offered or mentioned in 15 cases. The providers claimed, contrary to the evidence, that psychotherapy does not work. Dicussion The legal procedures can best be characterized as a sham, in which the patients are defenseless. The power imbalance and abuse were extreme, and several of the psychiatrists who argued for forced treatment obtained court orders for administering drugs and dosages that were dangerous. We suggest forced medication be abandoned.

Voting restrictions associated with health inequities in teenage birth rates

ObjectivesSince the Landmark Shelby V. Holder Supreme Court Ruling, the number of laws in the United States that make it difficult to vote has increased dramatically. This may lead to legislation that limits access to health care, including options for family planning services. We determine whether voting restrictions are associated with county-level teenage birth rates. Study designThis is an ecological study. MethodsThe Cost of Voting Index, a state-level measure of barriers to voting during US elections from 1996 to 2016, was used as a proxy for access to voting. County-level teenage birth rates were obtained from the County Health Rankings data. We used multilevel modeling to determine whether restrictive voting laws were associated with county-level teenage birth rates. We tested whether associations varied across racial and socio-economic groups. ResultsWhen confounders were included, a significant association was observed between increasing voting restrictions and teenage birth rates (β = 1.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.54, 2.89). A Cost of Voting Index–median income interaction term was tested and was statistically significant (β = −1.00, 95% confidence interval: −1.36, −0.64), indicating that the observed relationship was particularly strong among lower-income counties. The number of reproductive health clinics per capita within each state is a potential mediator. ConclusionRestrictive voting laws were associated with higher teenage birth rates, particularly for low-income counties. Future work should use methods in which a causal relation can be identified.

Aesthetic Preferences and Policy Preferences as Determinants of US Supreme Court Writing Style

AbstractRecent literature on writing style in US Supreme Court opinions has focused on style as a means of furthering justices’ policy goals. In particular, an opinion’s clarity is proposed to make the implementation of the announced policy more likely. We give a formal argument that the observed distribution of opinion clarity is not easily reconcilable with justices who are striving to write clearly in service of policy implementation-related goals; this is true even if there are case-level costs that sometimes make writing clearly more difficult. We propose that justices having aesthetic preferences – essentially, stylistic preferences over opinion language that are unrelated to policy implementation – that they weight heavily could explain the observed distribution of opinion clarity. Our analysis of some 4,500 majority opinions 1955–2008 is largely consistent with our theoretical argument.

MP21-05 THE RESPONSE FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: AN EVALUATION OF MEDICAL SOCIETY CONSENSUS STATEMENTS FOLLOWING THE SUPREME COURT RULING ON DOBBS V. JACKSON WOMEN'S HEALTH ORGANIZATION

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP21-05 THE RESPONSE FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS: AN EVALUATION OF MEDICAL SOCIETY CONSENSUS STATEMENTS FOLLOWING THE SUPREME COURT RULING ON DOBBS V. JACKSON WOMEN'S HEALTH ORGANIZATION Samir Merheb and Kevin Campbell Samir MerhebSamir Merheb More articles by this author and Kevin CampbellKevin Campbell More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003246.05AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The recent Supreme Court of the United States decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has demonstrated the potential political impact and government interference in providing evidence based care within reproductive and fertility medicine. We aim to evaluate consensus statements from medical groups within the Council of Medical Specialty Societies (CMSS), and the American Urological Association (AUA) in response to the impact of this decision on medical care and reproductive rights. METHODS: A total of 60 societal statements were collected from CMSS (N = 48) and the AUA (N = 12) after the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision on June 24th, 2022. Statements were collected from either a society’s main website or social media posts. The strength of each statement was graded as “no position statement”, “moderate statement”, and “strong statement”. Moderate statements were categorized as denunciation of decision and provision of support for patients. Strong statements incorporated a call to action from legislation, physicians, or creation of a task force. Time from decision to statement was recorded and a qualitative evaluation of key words from each statement was performed through a word cloud. RESULTS: Of the 60 societies, 29 (48.3%), 20 (33.3%), and 16 (26.7%) made no, moderate, or strong position statements, respectively (Figure 1). Average number of days until statement was 4.5, with 12 (33.3%) making a statement on day 0. 3 (25%) of AUA societies made a statement in comparison to 34 (71%) of CMSS. Patient-physician relationship (26 mentions), access to care (16 mentions), interference from government (11 mentions), and evidence-based care (10 mentions) were the most prominent key points (Figure 2). CONCLUSIONS: The recent ruling by the Supreme Court regarding Dobbs v. Women’s Health Organization has prompted a response by majority of the CMSS, most of which highlight the patient-physician relationship. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e286 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Samir Merheb More articles by this author Kevin Campbell More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

2022년 형사소송법 중요 판례 평석

In 2022, there were numerous Supreme Court rulings in the field of criminal procedure law. Among them, eleven important judgments with substantial meanings related to criminal practice, theory, and guarantee of basic rights of the people were selected to introduce the issues and to give a brief review. The main judgments introduced in the paper include the following; ① the court-appointed absentee property manager is a legal representative with the right to file a complaint; ② the arrest of flagrant offender requirement for 'necessity of arrest' and its criteria; ③ even when the investigative agency does not notify foreigners of consular notification without delay to make the arrest and detention procedure illegal, the principle of exclusion of illegal evidence will not be applied as an exception; ④ the meaning of information storage media belonging to the suspect who is entitled to participate in the seizure and search procedure as much as those who submit the evidence voluntarily; ⑤ if electronic information stored in a remote server can be confiscated or not when the warrant states only ‘electronic information stored in information processing devices such as computers’; ⑥ judgment on the obligation to acknowledge reduced facts among the criminal facts charged; ⑦ judgment on whether the statements made by video recordings in violation of methods and procedures can be accepted in accordance with Article 312, Paragraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act; ⑧ judgment on unconstitutionality of the special clause on the admissibility of evidence concerning the testimony of sexual violence victims under 19 years old in the video; ⑨ if the defense counsel’s cross-examination and witness’ statements can be used as evidence when the witness (victim) does not appear after only half of the witness interrogation without notifying his or her whereabouts; ⑩ judgement on whether the direct appeal to supreme court by the accused (which is not recognized by the court according to Article 373 of the criminal procedure act) can be recognized as an appeal when the prosecutor appeals to higher court making the case concur; ⑪ if the district court sentences the defendant to more than 10 years in prison or imprisonment, whether the prosecutor can appeal on the grounds that the sentence is light.
 Through active criticism of the above rulings and discussions, many developments are expected in the field of criminal procedure law case and theory this year.

“Gundamentalism”

“They talk about gun rights. What about Chris's right to live?”—Richard Martinez, after his son Chris was killed in the 2014 Santa Barbara spree shootings“Your dead kids don't trump my Constitutional rights.”—Joe “the Plumber” Wurzlebacher, responding to Richard MartinezFirearms and ballistics are at the center of public debate in the United States today. They are technologies that are associated both with danger (in the form of gun violence) and safety (in the form of claims that firearms offer personal protection). This essay explores our understanding of the role of gun rights in American society through history: an issue which recent Supreme Court rulings have moved to the forefront of political debates in the face of efforts to regulate firearms and stem the tide of gun violence in the United States.

The Israeli Supreme Court Rules Non-material Losses are Recoverable Under Montreal Convention

The Israeli Supreme Court Rules Non-material Losses are Recoverable Under Montreal Convention