Sunday, April 21, 2013
As I've said numerous times, including in yesterday's roundup, it is Supreme Court season both in Washington, DC and on LexBlog Network as our members have been on a tear when it comes to providing detailed analysis of major decisions. It's impossible for me to accurately describe, so do go visit LXBN's Supreme Court section for the full view. In the meantime, here's two of the most interesting cases covered—ones we've been tracking all the way up through the circuit courts—and another trending topic on our network.
- There's no way around it, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics is absolutely a landmark case—one that could have a very huge bearing on scientific and healthcare research in our country. At dispute in the case is whether or not companies can patent human genes, and specifically in this case, genes that cause cancer. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case on Monday, and as she's done with this case at every level, Antoinette Konski provides excellent analysis on the Personalized Medicine Bulletin.
Friday, April 5, 2013
Criminological theory is admittedly weak in this area. There are things that are criminally wrong, deliberately wrong, accidentally wrong, wrong for all the right reasons, wrong for all the wrong reasons, and just plain annoying. Legal systems everywhere are busy studying ways of passing new laws dealing with Internet misbehavior, so the arena has become a sort of "test-bed" or "mini-society" where all sorts of moral deconstruction and decoding goes on. This ethereal realm we call CYBERSPACE is intriguing but full of potential dangers. Barney (2000), for one, hopes that it will eventually be used to perfect democracy. Others see it as offering little more than an underground economy and tempting addictions. It is both a blessing and curse. Nobody has any good idea about how to regulate or police it.