Courts have faced a wave of compelled disclosure cases recently. By government mandate,
tobacco manufacturers must include graphic warnings on their cigarette packages, doctors …

Trust clearly plays a role in the democratic legitimacy of government decisions, 2 but the
relationship between law and trust continues to be ambiguous. Thinkers have staked out …

More than twenty-one years after Robert Bork's failed Supreme Court nomination and
seventeen years after Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the …

Two types of distortions often arise in abortion jurisprudence. The first is distortion of
scientific fact. Too often abortion opponents distort medical facts, and courts accept those …

When legislation or governmental policies are challenged in federal court as violating
individual constitutional rights,'federal district court judges may 1. Constitutional rights claims …

Three Harvard Law School alumni-James Bradley Thayer, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., and
Louis D. Brandeis-have had outsized impacts on judicial review, how it is conducted and …

Judicial review has a blind spot. Doctrinal and scholarly focus on individual rights has
crowded out alertness to the way in which legislatures and courts characterize the state …

Issues surrounding the regulation of abortion are among the most pressing in modern
American health care policy. The passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act …

The Court's abortion decisions embody an ongoing debate on the legitimacy of
constitutional protection of the right to choose. This debate unfolds most obviously as a …

A. Interference with Belief and Conscience B. Intrusions into Family Decision-making C. Intrusions
into Medical Decision-making Page 1 ABORTION, THE UNDUE BURDEN STANDARD, AND …