Topic
Supreme Court Decisions
About: Supreme Court Decisions is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1804 publications have been published within this topic receiving 17066 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors introduce child/adolescent psychiatric nurses to the historical circumstances that have influenced the legal status of children and their parents and present an ethical framework based on non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice to assist nurses in considering their responsibility to children and parents during the psychiatric admission of a child.
Abstract: The purpose of this article is to introduce child/adolescent psychiatric nurses to the historical circumstances that have influenced the legal status of children and their parents. Recent Supreme Court decisions affecting the rights of children during admission to psychiatric treatment will be discussed. The ethical issues involved and an ethical framework based on non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice will be presented to assist nurses in considering their responsibility to children and parents during the psychiatric admission of a child.
7 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyse the legal case of D.L.W. (2016) through the trial, appellate and Supreme Court decisions, and mine the legal texts produced for reasoning and rhetoric pertaining to the interpretation of the legal term bestiality.
Abstract: This paper undertakes a critical methodology of case law that unpacks the sociality of the legal case. Our paper analyzes the legal case of D.L.W. (2016) through the trial, appellate and Supreme Court decisions, and mines the legal texts produced for reasoning and rhetoric pertaining to the interpretation of the legal term bestiality. The future for animal rights activists in Canada seems especially bleak after the case. Wholesale legislative change might provide the only way forward for activists. By unpacking the legislative, social, factual and judicial understandings of bestiality, it is clear the Supreme Court of Canada decision causes more problems for human-animal relations than it solves.
7 citations
TL;DR: The Pearson v Callahan decision as discussed by the authors is the most relevant to our work, since it reverses Saucier v Katz, which required courts to reach the merits of constitutional tort claims before addressing qualified immunity.
Abstract: Few Supreme Court decisions have been as completely unsurprising as Pearson v Callahan. Pearson overturned Saucier v Katz, which required courts to reach the merits of constitutional tort claims before addressing qualified immunity. Since qualified immunity precludes damages unless defendants violate “clearly established” rights, Saucier mandated some merits adjudications incapable of supporting damages judgments in those particular cases, because the rights violated had not been “clearly established” at the time of the defendants’ actions. These “unnecessary” merits adjudications had been criticized by sitting Justices and prominent
7 citations
TL;DR: Doctors in the Netherlands may agree to requests for euthanasia from patients who are neither terminally ill nor suffering physically, according to a historic judgment in the Dutch Supreme Court.
Abstract: Doctors in the Netherlands may agree to requests for euthanasia from patients who are neither terminally ill nor suffering physically, according to a historic judgment in the Dutch Supreme Court. In the test case, decided by the country's highest legal authority, psychiatrist Dr Boudewijn Chabot was found guilty of having helped with the suicide of a healthy and competent woman who had wished to die since the death of her two sons. But the court chose not to punish him, though suicide assisted by a doctor carries a three year jail sentence. Dr Chabot had already been acquitted twice, but the public prosecution pursued the case to the highest court.
The Supreme Court accepted that Dr Chabot had followed guidelines to establish that his …
7 citations