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.

Texas v United States: The Affordable Care Act Is Constitutional and Will Remain So.

Abstract: On December 14, 2018, in a widely reported decision, a federal judge in Texas ruled that the entire Affordable Care Act (ACA) is unconstitutional. The judge reasoned that since the ACA’s “individual mandate” is unconstitutional, the rest of the law cannot stand without it. However, the ACA will remain in place pending appeal, and it is highly unlikely that this ruling will stand.

Regulating Greenhouse Gases by Mandatory Information Disclosure

Abstract: Mandatory information disclosure has been heralded as a revolutionary and strikingly low-cost environmental policy tool. The author analyzes domestic and international disclosure policies, using the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) as the paradigm case study. The author proposes governments should expand their use of mandatory information disclosure from toxics to regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. The Note analyzes various efforts to establish voluntary and mandatory greenhouse gas registries, along with the business risks and opportunities associated with such disclosure. The author proposes countries adopt a mandatory Greenhouse Gas Release Inventory (GGRI) as a first step to fight global climate change, and eventually to be integrated within a cap-and-trade system. The GGRI should eliminate asymmetric information among interested stakeholders, providing them with detailed information on industry leaders and laggards, thereby allowing assessments of companies overall risk exposure to inevitable global warming regulation. By harnessing the power of information to shame, reward, and enlighten, policymakers can empower investors, consumers, regulators, environmental groups, and even corporate management to influence corporate climate practices.

Toward a New Theory of the Shareholder Role: 'Sacred Space' in Corporate Takeovers

Abstract: Corporate law expresses a profound ambiguity toward the role of shareholders. Courts announce that shareholders are "critical to the theory that legitimates the exercise of power - by directors and officers over vast aggregations of property that they do not own." At the same time shareholders have a very difficult time actually making any corporate decisions. In this Article, we strive to define a new role for shareholders by drawing on economic theories of the firm and the structure of corporate law. More particularly we examine the role of shareholders in hostile corporate takeovers, the area where the interests of shareholders and directors collide most dramatically, and highlight a necessary "sacred space" for shareholder self-help, free of director or judicial intrusion.

The Medicalization of Poverty: A Dose of Theory.

Abstract: Is the medicalization of poverty a rational and humane response to an intractable problem, or just the latest in a long series of ineffective and costly attempts to address the problem? Considerable ink has been spilled on the dispute, with each side marshalling heart-rending anecdotes to help make their case - along with the obligatory statistics and regression analyses. Rather than add more verbiage to that dispute, this article sketches out a framework for understanding the phenomenon of medicalization, along with a description of the demand-side and supply-side factors that have brought us to this pass.

Improving Information on Public Health Law Best Practices for Obesity Prevention and Control

Abstract: In 2008, Representative John Read of Mississippi recently co-sponsored state legislation that would ban restaurants from serving obese customers. He later admitted that the bill was a publicity stunt,meant to “shed a little light on the number one problem in Mississippi.” Although controversial, Read’s bill exemplifies both the current perception of obesity as a national public health problem and the general sentiment underlying the types of interventions that are being considered to address this issue. The proposed legislation also demonstrates how policymakers can use or, in this case misuse, information about obesity to generate significant discussion on an issue along with ill-conceived legal interventions. Information sharing and the methods used to share best practices are components of the fourth core element of public health legal preparedness.