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.

Technological Evolution and the Devolution of Corporate Financial Reporting

Abstract: The role of technological evolution as a potential causal factor in the recent financial scandals has not yet been fully explored This paper looks at technology-induced changes in the issuers' marketplace environment, in the trading behavior of investors and in the tools employed by technology-oriented firms to make the case that motive, opportunity and the potential for rationalization of less-than-candid financial reporting were intensified by these trends In particular, these forces suggest that some sizable portion of financial misreporting was not selfish on the part of managers but a predictable feedback loop generated by competitive forces If so, there are important lessons to be learned with respect to the appropriate forms of (and forums for) deterrence, as well as with respect to on-going debates about the philosophy of financial reporting

Five Ethical Values to Guide Health System Reform.

Abstract: mate there may be a need for more than 2 million per year by 2025, potentially outpacing the supply of knee surgeons. Most of the increase will come from the growing aging population, according to Geller, but some may be related to other factors, such as obesity or physical activity levels. Geller advises joint-friendly exercises. “Things like a stationary bike or an elliptical ... are probably the best form of exercise because the impact on a joint is minimal,” he said. Lieberman’steamisnowlookingatprevalenceofkneeOAinlivingpopulationsfromdifferent parts of the world who have different lifestyles and levels of physical activity. Because physical activity and overweight influence each other, the researchers will try to control for both variables independently in these studies to parse their individual contributions to knee OA. The researchers are also focusing on the effects of physical activity on joints in general and cartilage in particular using animal models in the laboratory. In the end, having a happy medium of physical activity may turn out to be a reasonable approach to warding off knee OA, along with maintaining a healthful diet and weight to reduce joint-damaging inflammation and abnormal load bearing. “To me, what’s important about the paper is that it suggests that OA is much more preventable than we often assume,” Lieberman said.

Foreword: Academic Influence on the Court

Abstract: The critics of theoretical scholarship sometimes miss the ways in which theory can influence solutions to legal problems And the supporters sometimes overstate their case, neglecting the cost of a legal professoriate that is increasingly unable to talk to judges (or even to their own graduates) But that debate is only one aspect of a larger set of questions about what, in fact, influences judges Rezumat: Criticii ocolarizarii teoretice pierd uneori din vedere modul in care teoria poate influenþa soluþiile problemelor juridice ai susþinatorii exagereaza uneori, neglijând costul unui profesorat de drept, care intâmpina din ce in ce mai multe dificultaþi in a vorbi cu judecatorii (sau chiar cu proprii absolvenþi) Dar aceasta dezbatere este doar un aspect al unui set mai mare de intrebari cu privire la ceea ce influenþeaza, de fapt, judecatorii

Banning Abortion in Cases of Down Syndrome: Important Lessons for Advances in Genetic Diagnosis.

Abstract: In December 2017, Ohio passed into law legislation that prohibited physicians from performing abortions if the pregnant woman’s decision was influenced by her belief that the fetus has Down syndrome. Physicians who perform abortions in these cases would face fourth-degree felony charges and revocation of their medical license. No other state bans abortion specifically for Down syndrome, but several ban abortions in cases of genetic diseases. Lower courts have struck down most such laws, holding they violate the constitutional rights of women. In February 2, a federal district court judge blocked enforcement of Ohio’s law pending a final determination. This article explores the compelling legal and ethical issues raised by the Ohio statute. It compares the statute with similar bans on abortion in other states and considers why courts have struck many of these bans down as unconstitutional. The article also examines the potential consequences of the Ohio statute for women and their families; for the patient-physician relationship; and for persons with disabilities. Ultimately, such laws do little to advance the values that are at the heart of both reproductive rights and disability rights movements, namely bodily autonomy, self-determination, equality, and inclusion.

Military Commissions and the Paradigm of Prevention

Abstract: Why military commissions? Given the United States’s track record of success in trying terrorists in civilian criminal courts, and the availability of courts-martial to try war crimes, why has the United States government, under both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations alike, insisted on proceeding through untested military commissions instead? In May 2009, President Obama defended military commissions with the following claims: Military commissions have a history in the United States dating back to George Washington and the Revolutionary War. They are an appropriate venue for trying detainees for violations of the laws of war. They allow for the protection of sensitive sources and methods of intelligence-gathering; they allow for the safety and security of participants; and for the presentation of evidence gathered from the battlefield that cannot always be effectively presented in federal courts. Do these justifications warrant the use of military commissions? In this essay, I maintain that they do not. In the end, the impetus behind the military commissions is the hope – in my view, unsupported – that the commissions may permit easier convictions of individuals, and may allow prosecutors to avoid confronting the consequences of the United States’ systemic reliance on torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading tactics in its interrogations of detainees. In this respect, the commissions are best understood not as a legitimate forum for trying war crimes, but as an avenue for short-circuiting legal processes that might hold us accountable for our wrongs. The military commissions are a by-product of the “paradigm of prevention,” a term coined by then Attorney General John Ashcroft for the post-9/11 emphasis on aggressively preventing future terrorism, rather than responding to crime after the fact. That approach stressed early intervention and aggressive gathering of intelligence about future threats, and therefore led government officials to sweep broadly, presume guilt without substantial evidence, detain innocents, and adopt “enhanced interrogation techniques” to coerce detainees into talking. Those choices, in turn, have greatly complicated and compromised the task of holding terrorists accountable, because such illegal shortcuts on investigatory rules taint any evidence obtained therefrom, and make it inadmissible in a criminal trial. The military commissions reflect an ill-advised effort to avoid paying the price for the “paradigm of prevention.” That goal is an illegitimate one, and will in the end leave the commissions – and any convictions obtained in them – fundamentally tainted. Absent a willingness both to reckon candidly with the United States’ own past wrongs, and to proceed in the future under fundamentally fair trial procedures, the military commissions are likely to disserve our security interests and undermine our constitutional principles.