Archive for November, 2008

Students of Constitutional law spend a great deal of time learning about “levels of review” when studying the Supreme Court’s substantive due process jurisprudence. Particularly in the context of the Fourteenth and Fifth Amendments, the Court applies this hierarchy of levels when balancing state interests against individual liberties. However, a cursory review of what these “levels” are and how they are used indicates that the entire system is merely a tool to facilitate the Court’s long-held results-oriented approach to deciding social issues.

Read the rest of this entry »

Healthcare law classes generally include a discussion of off-label uses for prescription medication. If you happen to become engaged in such a discussion, be sure to mention this story.

In perusing the post-election headlines, I ran across this story about Californians protesting the passage of the controversial “Proposition 8″ which amended the state constitution to prohibit homosexual marriages. My purpose here is not to comment on the proposition or even the social issue at all. Rather, in reading the story, it occurred to me that I could not recall another instance in which there were public demonstrations and protests over the outcome of a popular vote.

I can understand people protesting the government when it makes unilateral actions that people disagree with. Certainly the purpose of protesting (and indeed, the First Amendment) is to ensure the people have a voice when their government takes actions with which the people disagree. But Proposition 8 was voted on by the people. Those for it and those opposed to it had their voices heard, not just with the pre-vote campaigning, but in the exercise of the vote itself.

So what do you think? Is this a perfectly legitimate protest, or does it border on “sour grapes”? Are there any other instances I am not aware of where Americans protested the outcome of the direct exercise of democracy?