Institution
Georgetown University Law Center
About: Georgetown University Law Center is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Supreme court & Public health. The organization has 585 authors who have published 2488 publications receiving 36650 citations. The organization is also known as: Georgetown Law & GULC.
Topics: Supreme court, Public health, Global health, Health policy, Human rights
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
•
TL;DR: The authors argues that the critique of lawfare is no less abusive and political than the alleged lawfare it attacks, and explores the vision of politics and law underlying the lawfare critique through a reading of the most significant theorist who defends that vision, the German theorist Carl Schmitt.
Abstract: "Lawfare" is the use of law as a weapon of war against a military adversary. Lawfare critics complain that self-proclaimed "humanitarians" are really engaged in the partisan and political abuse of law - lawfare. This paper turns the mirror on lawfare critics themselves, and argues that the critique of lawfare is no less abusive and political than the alleged lawfare it attacks. Radical lawfare critics view humanitarian law with suspicion, as nothing more than an instrument used by weak adversaries against strong military powers. Casting suspicion on humanitarian law by attacking the motives of humanitarian lawyers, they undermine disinterested argument, and ultimately undermine the validity of their own critique.The paper then explores the vision of politics and law underlying the lawfare critique through a reading of the most significant theorist who defends that vision, the German theorist Carl Schmitt. Through a reading and critique of Schmitt, the article examines both the force of the lawfare critique and its flaws.
19 citations
••
TL;DR: The guilt of Nazi war criminal, Adolf Eichmann, has long been settled as discussed by the authors, however, during the trial and for years after, Hannah Arendt questioned the legal theories upon which the Jerusalem court relied.
Abstract: The guilt of Nazi war criminal, Adolf Eichmann, has long been settled. However, during the trial and for years after, Hannah Arendt questioned the legal theories upon which the Jerusalem court relied. Part 1 of this article discusses how Arendt was uncertain about the use of precedent to judge unprecedented acts. Part 2 concerns the logic of proving Eichmann's culpable mental state when he came from a culture where morality had been turned on its head. Part 3 reveals Arendt's struggle with the rationale for universal jurisdiction as well as her unconventional understanding of 'territory'. Part 4 deals with Arendt's views on group affiliation and how those views informed her definition of 'genocide'. Finally, Part 5 details Arendt's most famous writings on "the banality of evil" and how Eichmann was found guilty, not for succumbing to immoral temptation or being a depraved deviant, but instead for conscientiously observing the flawed mores of the Third Reich. While Arendt ultimately supported Eichmann's conviction, her concerns surrounding the trial raise questions that are still relevant today.
19 citations
•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose a four-part approach to accelerating progress towards fulfilling the right to health: 1) national legal and policy reform, incorporating right-to-health obligations and principles including equity, participation, and accountability in designing, implementing, and monitoring the health sector, as well as an all-of-government approach in advancing the public's health.
Abstract: Ever more constitutions incorporate the right to health, courts continue to expand their right to health jurisprudence, and communities and civil society increasingly turn to the right to health in their advocacy. Yet the right remains far from being realized. Even with steady progress on numerous fronts of global health, vast inequities at the global and national levels persist, and are responsible for millions of deaths annually. We propose a four-part approach to accelerating progress towards fulfilling the right to health: 1) national legal and policy reform, incorporating right to health obligations and principles including equity, participation, and accountability in designing, implementing, and monitoring the health sector, as well as an all-of-government approach in advancing the public's health; 2) litigation, using creative legal strategies, enhanced training, and promotion of progressive judgments to increase courts' effectiveness in advancing the right to health; 3) civil society and community engagement, empowering communities to understand and claim this right and building the capacity of right to health organizations; and 4) innovative global governance for health, strengthening World Health Organization leadership on health and human rights, further clarifying the international right to health, ensuring sustained and scalable development assistance, and conforming other international legal regimes (e.g., trade, intellectual property, and finance) to health and human rights norms. We offer specific steps to advance each of these areas, including how a new global health treaty, a Framework Convention on Global Health, could help construct these four pillars.
19 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that resolving international regulatory issues will require reforming the approach that has been taken to global trade negotiations, and that international discussions around the most challenging issues in the digital economy ought to move away from the "horse-trading" nature of traditional trade negotiations and towards a strategy focused on regulatory cooperation.
Abstract: Technology is transforming global trade. The global trading system, however, has struggled to keep up with changes in technology. One of the major challenges for the trading system is that the issues raised by digitally enabled commerce are largely regulatory in nature. The issues that are at the forefront of digital trade increasingly relate to citizens’ most fundamental interactions, including speech, finance, energy, and transportation. This paper argues that resolving these international regulatory issues will require reforming the approach that has been taken to global trade negotiations. International discussions around the most challenging issues in the digital economy ought to move away from the ‘horse-trading’ nature of traditional trade negotiations and towards a strategy focused on regulatory cooperation. Failure to achieve regulatory cooperation could further fragment digital services based upon national borders. The Internet has the potential to positively impact the global economy precisely because it is global, decentralized, and bottom-up in nature. International policymaking through regulatory cooperation can maintain those principles, while protecting fundamental national concerns such as stability, privacy, and security.
19 citations
Authors
Showing all 585 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Lawrence O. Gostin | 75 | 879 | 23066 |
Michael J. Saks | 38 | 155 | 5398 |
Chirag Shah | 34 | 341 | 5056 |
Sara J. Rosenbaum | 34 | 425 | 6907 |
Mark Dybul | 33 | 61 | 4171 |
Steven C. Salop | 33 | 120 | 11330 |
Joost Pauwelyn | 32 | 154 | 3429 |
Mark Tushnet | 31 | 267 | 4754 |
Gorik Ooms | 29 | 124 | 3013 |
Alicia Ely Yamin | 29 | 122 | 2703 |
Julie E. Cohen | 28 | 63 | 2666 |
James G. Hodge | 27 | 225 | 2874 |
John H. Jackson | 27 | 102 | 2919 |
Margaret M. Blair | 26 | 75 | 4711 |
William W. Bratton | 25 | 112 | 2037 |