Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSchlesinger, Mark
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:58.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:51:21Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:51:21Z
dc.date.issued2013-01-09T08:55:26-08:00
dc.identifieryjhple/vol1/iss1/13
dc.identifier.contextkey3551121
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/5858
dc.description.abstractAt a time when the U.S. Supreme Court stands accused of undermining the legitimacy of American democracy, it might seem superfluous to question its wisdom in the interpretation of more mundane matters of public policy. But the Court is rarely given an opportunity to tinker with electoral outcomes. By contrast, it is constantly in the business of interpreting congressional legislation. Doing so involves more than simply establishing the constitutionality of a law. It also requires sensitivity to the substantive implications of a ruling, as reflected in the Court's analysis of congressional intent. These judgments are made difficult when the substantive implications are hard to discern or confusingly complicated. These difficulties can compromise sensible judicial interpretation of laws that shape contemporary health policy.
dc.titleMismanaged Care: The Challenges Facing Judicial Interpretation of Contemporary Health Policy
dc.source.journaltitleYale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjhple/vol1/iss1/13


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record