Saint Louis University
Saint Louis University School of Law Research: Scholarship CommonsNot a member yet
3119 research outputs found
Sort by
Black Lives Matter: Bridging the Gap Between Accountability and Justice
Get PDFThe United States has a long history of police violence against Black Americans. In this article, Nicole Chabloz discusses the Chauvin verdict and the impact it will have on the fight for justice and equality.https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lawjournalonline/1064/thumbnail.jp
From Mandates to Governance: Restructuring the Employment Relationship
Get PDFEmployers are saddled with a dizzying array of responsibilities to their employees. Meant to advance a wide array of workplace policies, these demands have saddled employment with the burden of numerous social ends. However, that system has increasingly come under strain, as companies seek to shed employment relationships and workers lose important protections when terminated. In this Article, we propose that employers and employees should be given greater flexibility with a move from mandates to governance. Many of the employment protections required from employers stem from employees’ lack of organizational power. The imbalance is best addressed by providing workers with governance rights within the firm. In exchange for these governance rights, governments can lift or relax many employment mandates. In addition, certain responsibilities currently assigned to employers will be lifted and placed on the larger society—where they would be more appropriately carried. This rebalancing of the employment relationship will lead to a more economically secure and empowered populace while at the same time freeing businesses to better pursue their entrepreneurial endeavors
Disparities in Health Care: The Pandemic’s Lessons for Health Lawyers
Get PDFPopulation-level disparities in health and health care came to the forefront of U.S. public consciousness in 2020. As the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic stratification of COVID-19 infection and death rates emerged with chilling clarity, the Black Lives Matter protests of the summer focused millions of Americans on the complex, structural nature of inequity and its long-lasting effects.Access to quality health care is a “social determinant of health,” meaning that it is one of the “non-medical factors that influence health outcomes . . . the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life.” Although it may seem obvious that differential access to high-quality care results in differential health outcomes, less obvious are the ways that multiple factors—including facially neutral laws and organizational practices—interact over time to produce population-level disparities in care and outcomes.
In 2021, all U.S. health lawyers should monitor and consider the following key developments affecting equitable access to health care:• The ongoing pandemic response and the disparate access to U.S. health care systems that it reveals;• The ongoing expansion of Medicaid eligibility under the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the legality of exceptions to federal requirements granted to state Medicaid programs;• The continuing evolution in publicly-funded health insurance toward payment models that reward positive health outcomes (and punish poor ones); and• The ongoing debate over federal law preventing discrimination in health care eligibility and delivery of care.
Differences in health outcomes between populations—defined not only by differences in race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, but also by disability status, age, geographic location, language, immigration status, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation—are not new. Nor are group differences in access to care, insurance coverage, and quality of care that closely align to social, economic, and/or other environmental disadvantage. But, with intensifying and warranted attention to health inequity and its financial and social costs, U.S. health lawyers across the system should be alert to the ways that facially neutral organizational practices and policies reinforce health care disparities and thereby contribute to disparate health outcomes
Is There a Cure for Vaccine Nationalism?
Get PDF“[V]accine nationalism . . . should serve as a reality check for the status of global health cooperation in the twenty-first century.
Wade’s Way No More? The Future of Reproductive Rights in Light Of Texas Senate Bill 8’s Constitutionality
Get PDFThere are many hot-topic discussions occurring in today\u27s political climate. In this article, Dolly Suresh focuses on the recent legislation in Texas, the Texas Heartbeat Act, and the conversations surrounding it.https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lawjournalonline/1074/thumbnail.jp
2021--Center for International and Comparative Law and Saint Louis University Law Journal Symposium on Misinformation/Disinformation & the Law
No full textThe avenues for misinformation (the dissemination of inaccurate content, irrespective of intent) and disinformation (the deliberate spread of inaccurate information with the purpose of misleading others) have increased dramatically in recent years, in both the online and offline environments. This symposium seeks to map out the heterogeneity of misinformation and disinformation, and in particular its salience in the legal and regulatory space, as well as possible solutions to ongoing manifestations of mis/disinformation.https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj_cicl_symposia/1000/thumbnail.jp
Barriers to Medical Board Discipline: Cultural and Organizational Constraints
Get PDFMedical boards are responsible for disciplining physicians who inflict egregious harm on their patients, yet they often fail to do so. This Article develops a cultural and organizational framework for explaining why boards so often fail to discipline physicians. The framework highlights three types of barriers that impede board action: (1) input barriers that prevent hospitals and clinics from reporting harm to boards, (2) processing barriers that prevent boards from taking sufficient action against physicians who do harm, and (3) output barriers that prevent boards from sharing information about physicians who do harm with other disciplinary agencies like other medical boards and law enforcement. The Article demonstrates how the interplay between these barriers reduces the likelihood that boards will discipline physicians who harm patients and also shows how boards behave like other kinds of organizations in similar situations. The Article concludes with a set of solutions to overcoming each type of barrier and explains why an organizational and cultural perspective is essential for identifying gaps between boards’ stated goals and their actions and for developing effective solutions
Fake News & International Criminal Law
Get PDFIn a decade defined by fake news, nations have weaponized disinformation to attack political, legal, and social systems throughout the world. Specifically, in recent years, government leaders have spread fake news about the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) in efforts to turn public opinion against the ICC and deter its attempts to investigate and prosecute controversial cases. Given the ICC’s reliance on state party cooperation, not only does this use of fake news hamper the Court’s likelihood of successfully prosecuting crimes that are of most concern to the international community, but it also promotes a version of history that denies victims both truth and justice. This paper will specifically examine how the governments of the United States and Israel have utilized fake news to deter ongoing ICC investigations into crimes allegedly committed by U.S. and Israeli nationals, and the detrimental effects of these news campaigns. This paper will then identify changes necessary to better protect the ICC—and international criminal law more generally—against fake news campaigns, including the need for greater clarity and widespread global knowledge of the ICC’s powers and jurisdictional reach
Comments on Rights to Federally Funded Inventions and Licensing of Government Owned Inventions, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), United States Department of Commerce, Notice of proposed rulemaking. 86 FR 35. Agency/Docket Number: 201207-0327
Get PDFThis letter is written in response to the notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register on January 4, 2021, seeking public comments on the revised regulations proposed by NIST to the University and Small Business Patent Procedure Act of 1980 (the “Bayh-Dole Act”). We submit this letter as academics who engage in research on patent law and biomedical innovation. The arguments also reflect practical knowledge that one of us has acquired from a decade of working with U.S. universities and biotech companies in the process of technology transfer as a lawyer practicing in two highly regarded Boston law firms, and experience that others of us have gained from working in the U.S. government and engaging in intellectual property policy work on Bayh-Dole related issues. We submit that the proposed rule-making includes changes that are contrary to the intent and the stated purpose of the Bayh-Dole Act and that unduly limit the interpretive authority of the Federal Government in administering the Act. We suggest alternative ways in which regulations implementing the Bayh-Dole Act could be changed to further the Act’s intent and purpose
2021: Critical Race Theory and the Law
No full textThe Richard J. Childress Memorial Lecture, named in honor of former Dean Richard J. Childress (1969-1976), is a premier academic event highlighting a provocative and timely area of law. The lecture commemorates the contributions Dean Childress made academically, ethically, and socially to benefit the Saint Louis University School of Law.
Dean Childress was a member of the faculty at the School of Law for almost 30 years, and then served for 15 years as associate dean and dean. Among other achievements, Dean Childress is credited with founding the Saint Louis University Law Journal.
Every year, the Journal sponsors the Lecture and publishes the keynote address on a timely legal topic as well as responses from the lecture’s scholarly participants.
Established by the generosity of alumni and friends of the former dean, the lecture aims to enhance the exemplary teaching at the School of Law by bringing world-renowned scholars to campus for academic enrichment.
This year\u27s annual Childress Lecture, in cooperation with the Saint Louis University Department of African American Studies, will examine critical race theory, which seeks to critically examine American law as it intersects with issues of race and other social constructs in the United States.https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/childress_lecture/1000/thumbnail.jp