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 & Global health. The organization has 585 authors who have published 2488 publications receiving 36650 citations. The organization is also known as: Georgetown Law & GULC.

One Minute in Haditha: Ethics and Non-Conscious Decision-Making

Abstract: In November 2005, U.S. Marine Sergeant Frank Wuterich fired on and killed five unarmed Iraqi men standing by a car near the site of an improvised explosive device explosion (IED) in Haditha...

USDA Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Vendor Criteria: An Examination of US Administrative Agency Variations.

Abstract: The food retail environment has been directly linked to disparities in dietary behaviors and may in part explain racial and ethnic disparities in pregnancy-related deaths. The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), administered by the United States Department of Agriculture, is associated with improved healthy food and beverage access due to its requirement for minimum stock of healthy foods and beverages in WIC-eligible stores. The selection and authorization criteria used to authorize WIC vendors varies widely from state to state with little known about the specific variations. This paper reviews and summarizes the differences across 16 of these criteria enacted by 89 WIC administrative agencies: the 50 states, the District of Columbia, five US Territories, and 33 Indian Tribal Organizations. Vendor selection and authorization criteria varied across WIC agencies without any consistent pattern. The wide variations in criteria and policies raise questions about the rational for inconsistency. Some of these variations, in combination, may result in reduced access to WIC-approved foods and beverages by WIC participants. For example, minimum square footage and/or number of cash register criteria may limit vendors to larger retail operations that are not typically located in high-risk, under-resourced communities where WIC vendors are most needed. Results highlight an opportunity to convene WIC stakeholders to review variations, their rationale, and implications thereof especially as this process could result in improved policies to ensure and improve healthy food and beverage access by WIC participants. More work remains to better understand the value of state WIC vendor authorization authority, particularly in states that have provided stronger monitoring requirements. This work might also examine if and how streamlining WIC vendor criteria (or at least certain components of them) across regional areas or across the country could provide an opportunity to advance interstate commerce and promote an equitable supply of food across the food system, while ensuring the protection for local, community-oriented WIC vendors.

Hybrid and mixed dispute resolution processes: integrities of process pluralism

Abstract: This chapter explores how the primary and basic processes of negotiation, mediation, arbitration and adjudication have been blended, combined and changed to produce new forms of hybrid and mixed dispute resolution processes, which vary the roles of the parties (self-determination in mediation; representation in adjudication, arbitration and negotiation) and the third parties they may engage to assist in dispute resolution (or prevention) processes. As basic forms of dispute resolution have been used in different cultural, national, interna¬tional and institutionalized settings, serving different purposes and different parties’ needs and interests, it is useful to think about whether each process has its own integrity, purpose and ethics (fairness, justice, efficiency, privacy or transparency), and what we gain and lose by combining and altering the basic forms. The chapter uses the jurisprudence of Lon Fuller to query what issues are raised by combining basic processes to create new and hybrid approaches in different contexts.

Responding to COVID‐19: How to Navigate a Public Health Emergency Legally and Ethically

Abstract: Widespread social separation is rapidly becoming the norm, including closure of schools and universities, tele-commuting to work, bans on large gatherings, and millions of people isolated in their homes or make-shift facilities. Bans on international travel are already pervasive. Domestic travel restrictions are exceedingly rare, but now within the realm of possibility. Officials are even discussing cordon sanitaires (guarded areas where people may not enter or leave), popularly described as “lockdowns” or mass quarantines. When the health system becomes stretched beyond capacity, how can we ethically allocate scarce health goods and services? How can we ensure that marginalized populations can access the care they need? What ethical duties do we owe to vulnerable people separated from their families and communities? And how do we ethically and legally balance public health with civil liberties?

A Public Interest Perspective on the Impact of the Broadcasting Provisions of the 1996 Act

Abstract: This article was part of a symposium on the Tenth Anniversary of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It addresses three provisions relating to broadcasting: 1) Section 201, which added a new Section 336 to the Communications Act, governs the transition from analog to digital television; 2) Section 202, which directed the Federal Communications to change or review its broadcast ownership limits; and 3) Sections 203 and 204 which made changes to the license renewal process. After examining what had happened with respect to each of these provisions over the past decade, the article concludes that these provisions have not served the public interest and that the problems have been exacerbated by FCC inaction and delay.