Cost Containment in the Health Care Field and the Antitrust Laws

AbstractThe Supreme Court of the United States and other courts currently are considering the question of the extent to which the health care field should be subject to antitrust rules. This Article explores the special characteristics of the health care field, and the problems they create for antitrust analysis. Two current cases—Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Society (awaiting decision by the Supreme Court) and Kartell v. Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Inc. (pending in the District of Massachusetts)—illustrate the issues raised by efforts to contain health care costs through the setting of maximum fees. This Article suggests that traditional antitrust principles should and will prevail over arguments that such restraints are in the public interest.

Download Full-text

Advance Health Care Directives and “Public Guardian”: The Italian Supreme Court Requests the Status of Current and Not Future Inability

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2014/576391 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 2014 ◽

pp. 1-4 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Francesco Paolo Busardò ◽

Stefania Bello ◽

Matteo Gulino ◽

Simona Zaami ◽

Paola Frati

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Advance Directives ◽

Critical Issue ◽

Health Care Decisions ◽

The Public ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Status ◽

The Usa ◽

The Guardian

Advance health care decisions animate an intense debate in several European countries, which started more than 20 years ago in the USA and led to the adoption of different rules, based on the diverse legal, sociocultural and philosophical traditions of each society. In Italy, the controversial issue of advance directives and end of life’s rights, in the absence of a clear and comprehensive legislation, has been over time a subject of interest of the Supreme Court. Since 2004 a law introduced the “Public Guardian,” aiming to provide an instrument of assistance to the person lacking in autonomy because of an illness or incapacity. Recently, this critical issue has once again been brought to the interest of the Supreme Court, which passed a judgment trying to clarify the legislative application of the appointment of the Guardian in the field of advance directives.

Download Full-text

Constitutional Law in 1959–1960

American Political Science Review ◽

10.1017/s0003055400124220 ◽

1961 ◽

Vol 55 (1) ◽

pp. 112-135

Author(s):

David Fellman

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Gulf Of Mexico ◽

Supreme Court ◽

The United States ◽

Point Of View ◽

Important Place ◽

The Public ◽

The Pacific ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Pacific Ocean

The personnel of the Supreme Court remained unchanged during the 1959 Term. From the point of view of the decisions rendered in the public law field, this was an undistinguished Term. Few of the constitutional cases are likely to hold an important place among the precedents, and a considerable number of well-argued decisions turned entirely upon private law questions. But there was no dearth of writing, during the period under review, about the Court as an institution and about the Justices who sit there.Note may be made at this point of the latest chapter in the long dispute over the so-called tidelands. In 1947 the Supreme Court had ruled that, as against the claims of California, the United States possessed paramount rights in lands underlying the Pacific Ocean seaward from the low-water mark. Similar rulings were made in 1950 as regards the claims of Louisiana and Texas in the Gulf of Mexico. But with the enactment in 1953 of the Submerged Lands Act, the United States relinquished to the coastal states all of its rights in all lands beneath navigable waters within the three-mile limit, and in excess of that limit within state boundaries as they existed at the time a state became a member of the Union, or as theretofore approved by Congress. The limit of the grant was three leagues (about ten and one-half miles) in the Gulf of Mexico and three geographical miles in the Atlantic and Pacific. The actual extent of the claims of the coastal states involved in the question was therefore left to be settled by litigation.

Download Full-text

8. The Court and the world

The U.S. Supreme Court: A Very Short Introduction ◽

10.1093/actrade/9780190079819.003.0008 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 92-98

Author(s):

Linda Greenhouse

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Supreme Court ◽

The United States ◽

Specific Knowledge ◽

The Public ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The World ◽

Public Imagination ◽

The U.S

When the Framers set the Supreme Court in motion, they had no template for what they were about to create. “The court and the world” demonstrates that other countries were able to use the Supreme Court for inspiration, and many have done so. What they have chosen to take and leave from the Court’s example is instructive. Lifetime tenure is less common outside the United States, with most European courts preferring nine- or ten-year appointments and aiming for unanimity rather than majority. While specific knowledge about the Court is limited, the U.S. Supreme Court still holds a place in the public imagination.

Download Full-text

Constitutional Law in 1910–1911: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1910

American Political Science Review ◽

10.2307/1944649 ◽

1912 ◽

Vol 6 (4) ◽

pp. 513-523

Author(s):

Eugene Wambaugh

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Constitutional Law ◽

The United States ◽

Point Of View ◽

The Other ◽

The Public ◽

Preceding Article ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Constitutional Decisions

As was indicated in a preceding article, the chief feature of the judicial year 1909–1910, from the point of view of Constitutional Law, was that the decisions, though numerous, were comparatively unimportant. On the contrary the chief feature of the constitutional decisions of the judicial year 1910–1911 was that an unusual number of them appeared to the public to be of great interest and consequence. Hence it is advisable to deal with the judicial year 1910–1911 in a manner wholly different from that which was adopted with its predecessor. The article covering the judicial year 1909–1910 collected all the constitutional cases in the Supreme Court of the United States, and, with the briefest possible indication of the point decided, distributed them among the several clauses of the Constitution which they served to annotate. For the judicial year 1910–1911, on the other hand, the plan adopted is to confine attention almost wholly to the few decisions making the year memorable. Thus it becomes possible to give a rather full statement of those few decisions and now and then to add comments.

Download Full-text

Constitutional Law in 1931–32: The Constitutional Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in the October Term, 1931

American Political Science Review ◽

10.2307/1947344 ◽

1933 ◽

Vol 27 (1) ◽

pp. 39-57

Author(s):

Robert E. Cushman

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Constitutional Law ◽

The United States ◽

The Public ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Constitutional Decisions

In its decision in United States v. Smith, the Supreme Court has given final victory to President Hoover in his bitter fight with the Senate in January, 1931, over his appointments to the Federal Power Commission. On December 3, 1930, the President sent to the Senate Smith's nomination to the Federal Power Commission. On Saturday, December 20, 1930, the Senate advised and consented to the appointment and ordered the resolution of confirmation sent to the President. The Senate thereupon adjourned to Monday, January 5, 1931. On Monday, December 22, 1930, the President received the notification that the appointment had been confirmed and on the same day issued Smith's commission. Smith immediately took the oath of office and entered upon his duties. While the record of the Court does not disclose this fact, it will be recalled that one of the very first “duties” entered upon by Smith and his colleagues was the summary dismissal of two subordinates of the Commission generally admitted to have been active in the protection of the public against the aggressions of the so-called power interests. Accordingly, when the Senate convened on January 5, 1931, a majority of its members very much wished to recall the confirmation of Smith's appointment.

Download Full-text

The Hidden American Nativist Consensus

10.31219/osf.io/36z5y ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andrew Ifedapo Thompson ◽

Christopher Dinkel

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

American Politics ◽

The United States ◽

The Public ◽

Public Expectations ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Republic ◽

Recent Attention ◽

Eligibility Requirement ◽

The U.S

Nativism has received recent attention because of its salience in American politics, but it dates back to the early days of the Republic. We show nativist sentiments were established in the citizenship-eligibility requirement for the presidency have since been mirrored in the American public’s preferences outside of the executive. We argue that the inclusion of the natural born citizen clause in the U.S. Constitution helped set in motion public expectations for legislative and judicial office holders. Then, with a novel dataset, we show Americans who were not born in the United States have been severely underrepresented in Congress and on the Supreme Court. Finally, using two conjoint designs, we show candidates for Congress and the Supreme Court who fit a nativist mold are preferred by the public across party lines. Overall, we argue a nativist consensus exists in the public which could exacerbate inequalities of representation within American politics.

Download Full-text

Malpractice & Negligence: Cal. Supreme Court Clarifies Negligence Provisions under State’s Elder Abuse Act

The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics ◽

10.1017/s1073110500012973 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 27 (2) ◽

pp. 203-203

Author(s):

Kendra Carlson

Keyword(s):

Health Care ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Health Care Providers ◽

Elder Abuse ◽

Skilled Nursing Facility ◽

Pressure Sores ◽

Care Providers ◽

Nursing Facility ◽

Skilled Nursing ◽

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of California held, in Delaney v. Baker, 82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 610 (1999), that the heightened remedies available under the Elder Abuse Act (Act), Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 15657,15657.2 (West 1998), apply to health care providers who engage in reckless neglect of an elder adult. The court interpreted two sections of the Act: (1) section 15657, which provides for enhanced remedies for reckless neglect; and (2) section 15657.2, which limits recovery for actions based on “professional negligence.” The court held that reckless neglect is distinct from professional negligence and therefore the restrictions on remedies against health care providers for professional negligence are inapplicable.Kay Delaney sued Meadowood, a skilled nursing facility (SNF), after a resident, her mother, died. Evidence at trial indicated that Rose Wallien, the decedent, was left lying in her own urine and feces for extended periods of time and had stage I11 and IV pressure sores on her ankles, feet, and buttocks at the time of her death.

Download Full-text