Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:47:03.259Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Select Recent Court Decisions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2021

Bethany Engel  and
Juan Carlos Villafuerte
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Other
Information
American Journal of Law & Medicine , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 139 - 143
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics and Boston University 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 311 F.3d 259 (3d Cir. 2002).

2 Id. at 267.

3 18 U.S.C. § 669 (2002).

4 Id. at § 669(a).

5 18 U.S.C. § 24(b) (2002).

6 Whited, 311 F.3d at 261.

7 Id. at 262.

8 Id. at 263-64.

9 18 U.S.C. § 24(b).

10 Whited, 311 F.3d at 264.

11 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-191, 110 Stat. 1936 (1996).

12 514 U.S. 549 (1995).

13 529 U.S. 598 (2000).

14 Lopez, 514 U.S. at 558-59.

15 Morrison, 529 U.S. at 617.

16 Whited, 311 F.3d at 268.

17 Id.

18 Id. at 269.

19 Id. at 272.

1 No. 20000827, 2002 WL 31895671, at *1 (Utah Dec. 31, 2002).

2 UTAH CODE ANN. § 78-11-23 to -25 (2002).

3 Wood, 2002 WL 31895671, at *12.

4 UTAH CODE ANN. § 78-11-24 (2002).

5 UTAH CODE ANN. § 78-11-23.

6 Wood, 2002 WL 31895671, at *6.

7 Id.

8 Id.

9 Id. at *7.

10 Id. at *10.

11 Id.

12 Id. at *21 (Durham, C.J., dissenting).

13 Id. (Durham, C.J., dissenting).

14 Id. (Durham, C.J., dissenting).

15 Id. at *22 (Durham, C.J., dissenting).

16 505 U.S. 833 (1992) (plurality opinion).

17 See IDAHO CODE § 5-334 (Michie 1998); IND. CODE ANN. § 34-12-1-1 (West 1998); MINN. STAT. ANN. § 145.424 (West 1998); MO. ANN. STAT. § 188.130 (West 1996); N.D. CENT. CODE § 32-03-43 (1996); 42 PA. CONS. STAT. ANN. § 8305 (West 1998); S.D. CODIFIED LAWS §§ 21-55-1 to -2 (Michie 1987).

18 Kowitz, Julie F., Not Your Garden Variety Tort Reform: Statutes Barring Claims for Wrongful Life and Wrongful Birth are Unconstitutional Under the Purpose Prong of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 61 BROOK. L. REV. 235, 257 n.105 (1995)Google Scholar.

19 Casey, 505 U.S. at 877 (emphasis added).

20 Kowitz, supra note 26, at 252.

21 This is likely attributable to the Casey decision because its analysis was fact-intensive and result-oriented. Indeed, the Court in Casey simply assumed that the legislature's purpose in passing the challenged statute was to inform a woman's choice. Id.

22 See Wood, 2002 WL 31895671, at *8 (noting that the plaintiffs failed to present any statistical proof of the likelihood of doctors withholding information from women considering aborting a nonviable fetus).

23 Kowitz, supra note 26, at 272-73.