2024-03-29T02:05:28Zhttps://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/oai/requestoai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125862015-06-17T14:39:32Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Is There Such A Thing As Too Much Free Speech?
Bezanson, Randall P.
First Amendment
2013-01-19T19:55:14Z
2013-01-19T19:55:14Z
2013-01-19T19:55:14Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 601 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12586
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125842015-06-17T14:39:40Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Beneath the Surface of the Clean Water Act: Exploring the Depth of the Act’s Jurisdictional Scope of Groundwater Pollution
Makowski, Anna
Clean Water Act
Groundwater
2013-01-19T19:47:45Z
2013-01-19T19:47:45Z
2013-01-19T19:47:45Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 495 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12584
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125872015-06-17T14:39:32Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Regulating Blogging and Microblogging in China
Lee, Jyh-An
Blogging
Microblogging
2013-01-19T19:58:39Z
2013-01-19T19:58:39Z
2013-01-19T19:58:39Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 609 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12587
en
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125822015-06-17T14:39:34Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Evading Emergency: Strengthening Emergency Responses Through Integrated Pluralistic Governance
Gable, Lance
This Article examines the significant governance challenges that
arise during responses to public health emergencies and proposes a
new multifaceted strategy—integrated pluralistic governance—to
address these challenges. Emergency preparedness is an inherently
complex problem that entails the integration of scientific and medical
expertise, good logistical planning, and clear laws and policies. The
governance function has particular import for public health
emergencies because pandemics, hurricanes, and other disasters can
have profoundly divisive social and political consequences.
Moreover, recent disasters like Hurricane Katrina and the BP
Deepwater Horizon oil spill revealed an emergency preparedness and
response infrastructure in the United States that was broken: starved
of necessary resources, beset by problems at all levels of government,
and undermined by poor decision making at each of these levels.Governance theories are particularly relevant to addressing the
challenges posed by public health emergencies because these theories
can help to explain and shape outcomes within complex systems. This
Article delineates and explores three categories of governance
models: traditional governance models, New Governance models,
and diffuse governance models. These models provide insight into
existing efforts to govern public health emergencies within and
outside of formal emergency response systems and highlight
unexplored avenues for strengthening these systems. Integrated
pluralistic governance adopts aspects of all three governance models
and encourages the development of concurrency, coordination, and
redundancy to create a more effective and resilient public health
emergency response system.
2013-01-19T19:39:30Z
2013-01-19T19:39:30Z
2013-01-19T19:39:30Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 375 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12582
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125902015-06-17T14:39:23Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Casting Common Law and the Music Industry Adrift: Pre-1972 Recordings Enter Federal Safe Harbors
Pinchin, Andrew M.
2013-01-19T20:06:51Z
2013-01-19T20:06:51Z
2013-01-19T20:06:51Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 635 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12590
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125812015-06-17T14:27:58Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Revolting Developments
Wirtz, Richard S.
Impracticability and frustration of purpose are important
exceptions to the principle that contracts must be performed, come
what may. At common law, the general rule is that the promisor bears
the risk that a contract may become more burdensome or less
desirable to her as a result of changes in circumstances for which she
did not plan. But when an extraordinary circumstance renders a
promised performance so different from what was to be expected that
it changes the essential nature of that performance, the courts hold
that justice requires a departure from the general rule.
The law of impracticability and frustration, as it has evolved under
section 2-615 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), and section
261 of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts (Second Restatement),
is more confusing than it should be and frequently and unnecessarily
fails to achieve its purpose. Some easily implemented changes to the
rules will render outcomes in these cases more predictable and more
just.
2013-01-19T19:35:07Z
2013-01-19T19:35:07Z
2013-01-19T19:35:07Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 325 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12581
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125852015-06-17T14:27:54Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Lies, Damned Lies, and Journalism: Why Journalists Are Failing to Vindicate First Amendment Values and How a New Definition of “The Press” Can Help
Edelson, Chris
This Article identifies a specific problem—journalists who fail to
provide the public with the accurate information needed to foster
informed public opinion—and offers a specific solution: defining “the
press” to provide protections and prestige only to those whose work
actually advances First Amendment values.
American journalistic norms facilitate lying by politicians,
candidates for office, and other public figures. Because many
journalists are committed to the ideal of balance above truth, they are
often incapable of calling out lies. Instead, they create a false
equivalence by suggesting there are two sides to every argument. I
call this the “balance trap” problem—journalism that insists on
presenting, without comment, two sides to every story, even when one
side is demonstrably false. Politicians and other public figures are
able to exploit this reality by making false statements with impunity,
secure in the knowledge that journalists will not expose their
deceptions. This Article does something new by describing a definition of the
press that is based on specific examples of work journalists are doing
and proposing a way to assess whether this work advances First
Amendment values of truth and democratic competence. In addition,
this Article does something new by identifying a central role for
journalists themselves in defining press membership.
Other scholars who believe that members of the press deserve
specific protections seek to define press membership primarily
through courts or legislatures.
Ultimately, the goal of this Article is to give meaning to Oliver
Wendell Holmes’s assertion that “the real justification of a rule oflaw is that it helps to bring about a social end which we desire.”
Replacing balance trap journalism with journalism that gives
Americans the accurate information they need to make informed
decisions is a highly desirable social end. If we want to have a better
press corps, we must begin with a definition of the press that has the
potential to solve the balance trap problem by recognizing as
members of the press only those journalists whose work truly
advances First Amendment values.
2013-01-19T19:51:17Z
2013-01-19T19:51:17Z
2013-01-19T19:51:17Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 527 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12585
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125882015-06-17T14:39:30Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
Time for the Supreme Court to Address Off-Campus, Online Student Speech
Hudson, David L. Jr
2013-01-19T20:01:09Z
2013-01-19T20:01:09Z
2013-01-19T20:01:09Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 621 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12588
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125832015-06-17T14:39:47Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
A Graceful Exit: Redefining Terminal to Expand the Availability of Physician-Facilitated Suicide
Lewis, Browne C.
For almost ten years, Oregon stood alone as the state that
permitted terminally ill persons to choose the time and manner of
their deaths. Finally, in 2009, Oregon received company when the
State of Washington’s physician-facilitated suicide statute officially
went into effect in March of that year. Supporters of the statutes
hailed the enactments as a victory for persons seeking to die with
dignity. Persons from groups like Compassion & Choices vowed to
seek similar legislation in the remaining states. Representatives from
the Washington State Medical Association, hospice groups and
hospitals argued that the mandates of the statutes place physicians in
an unnatural position. In particular, the Medical Association’s
spokesman stated that physicians take an oath to save lives, not end
them.
Despite these objections, the number of persons in the country who
support physician-facilitated suicide has continued to grow. At the
end of 2009, the Montana Supreme Court indicated that physicianfacilitated
suicide is not against the state’s public policy.
This Article does not join the debate about the legalization of
physician-assisted suicide. Rather, I have two goals. First, I suggest
ways the current statutes could be improved to address the concerns
of the critics of physician-facilitated suicide. Second, I recommend
ways to expand the availability of physician-facilitated suicide so that
more people can exit gracefully. To that end, I analyze the laws in
Oregon and Washington and argue that the current statutes need to
be amended to effectuate their legislative purposes. That analysis
shows that the legislatures in those states attempted to regulate the process in order to protect the interests of terminally ill patients and
physicians. The statutory mandates are a step in the right direction,
but much work remains to truly honor those interests.
The statutes should be amended to close certain loopholes and to
ensure that the physician-facilitated suicide option is available to all
of the patients who need it. Persons suffering from physical
conditions that will lead to death within six months should not be the
only persons permitted to exit gracefully. As long as the safeguards
included in the statutes are followed, there is no good reason to
prohibit persons suffering from irreversible and incurable physical
diseases that lead to death from being classified as terminal.
In addition, persons diagnosed with irreversible and incurable
brain disorders, like severe dementia or Alzheimer’s disease, should
be able to avail themselves of the rights provided by the physicianfacilitated
suicide statutes. Alzheimer’s patients suffer a slow, painful
death. They revert to childhood and forget everyone around them. The
mental death they suffer is similar to the physical death experienced
by terminally physically ill patients. During the early stages of the
disease, most Alzheimer sufferers are still competent enough to
request physician-facilitated suicide. Therefore, the statutes should be
amended or interpreted to give them that option.
2013-01-19T19:42:29Z
2013-01-19T19:42:29Z
2013-01-19T19:42:29Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 457 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12583
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law
oai:scholarsbank.uoregon.edu:1794/125892015-06-17T14:39:29Zcom_1794_3786com_1794_7561com_1794_7550col_1794_12580
The Need for a Unified and Cohesive National Anti-SLAPP Law
Randazza, Marc J.
First Amendment
2013-01-19T20:03:09Z
2013-01-19T20:03:09Z
2013-01-19T20:03:09Z
2012
Article
91Or. L. Rev. 627 (2012)
0196-2043
http://hdl.handle.net/1794/12589
en_US
rights_reserved
University of Oregon School of Law