<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: free speech</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'free speech'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22free+speech%22&t=%22free+speech%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 01:59:28 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>An Intended Consequence</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5062223&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F0lOqIPCKq-k%2F</link>
            <description>The New Republic has an interesting article explaining &amp;#8220;How Campaign Finance Laws Made the British Press so Powerful.&amp;#8221; Basically, only British newspapers are free of regulations that suppress political speech. The author suggests adding more controls (including content restrictions) on the British newspapers to enforce &amp;#8220;impartial&amp;#8221; coverage. In other words, the media should be just as repressed as everyone else, and political leaders should be free of criticism.
Like many others, I have long thought that U.S. newspapers editorialize in favor of campaign finance restrictions to control competing speech and thereby become more powerful. After Citizens United, other organizations now enjoy the same First Amendment protections as media corporations like The New York Time...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5062223</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:23:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5062223</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Epic Win for First Amendment in Violent Videogame Case</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975840&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FobqD34Uv_fw%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThe Supreme Court scored an epic win for the First Amendment in striking down California’s prohibition on selling violent videogames to minors. The law was both overly broad—sweeping in a wide variety of games based on no objective standard and no age-based gradations—and underinclusive—with no restrictions on other types of media. With a few strictly drawn exceptions for historically unprotected speech—obscenity, incitement, fighting words—government lacks the power to restrict expression simply because of its content. And a legislature cannot create new types of unprotected speech simply by weighing its purported social costs against its alleged value.
“Reading Dante is unquestionably more cultured and intellectually edifying than playing Mortal Kombat,” Ju...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975840</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:28:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975840</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Embedded Networks of Influence in Health Care: An Illustrative Case</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4968427&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F06%2Fembedded-networks-of-influence-in.html</link>
            <description>At the 12th International Anti-Corruption Conference (IACC), sponsored by Transparency International, one of the&amp;nbsp;plenary sessions was devoted to the topic of &quot;embedded networks of influence.&quot;&amp;nbsp; The session description included this description of the topic as:the major stumbling block in the fight against corruption, namely, the power of 'embedded networks' in advancing personal or group interests through state institutions. The extent of their power can create what is known as “state capture” meaning democratic governance failure. It will take a close look at the influential role of private sector, especially of the multinational private sector.A recent investigative report in the Chronicle of Higher Education illustrated a striking case of how one key individual has affected...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4968427</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 19:11:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4968427</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Defending Anonymous Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4921387&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F53tWId1h4xQ%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesFor some time now, the U.S. Supreme Court has placed little weight on the value of anonymous speech, especially in the campaign finance context. True, in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission (1995), the Court struck down a state law prohibiting distributing anonymous campaign literature. But from Buckley v. Valeo (1976) onward, the Court has looked favorably on disclosure of campaign spending. Even Citizens United saw only one justice, Clarence Thomas, speak out in favor of anonymous speech.
Long-time First Amendment advocate Nat Hentoff raises some questions about limiting anonymous speech in this video. He praises Justice Thomas and recalls the importance of anonymous speech during the founding era.

Defending Anonymous Speech is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institut...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4921387</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:23:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4921387</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Government Control of Language and Other Protocols</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4902405&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FI8niYC-xAnE%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperIt might be tempting to laugh at France&amp;#8217;s ban on words like &amp;#8220;Facebook&amp;#8221; and Twitter&amp;#8221; in the media. France’s Conseil Supérieur de l&amp;#8217;Audiovisuel recently ruled that specific references to these sites (in stories not about them) would violate a 1992 law banning &amp;#8220;secret&amp;#8221; advertising. The council was created in 1989 to ensure fairness in French audiovisual communications, such as in allocation of television time to political candidates, and to protect children from some types of programming.
Sure, laugh at the French. But not for too long. The United States has similarly busy-bodied regulators, who, for example, have primly regulated such advertising themselves. American regulators carefully oversee non-secret advertising, too. Our govern...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4902405</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:35:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4902405</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Due Process Stops at the Campus Gates?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893405&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBGwwH_nACTM%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroPeople in the D.C. area maye be familiar with the tragic tale of Fairfax teacher Sean Lanigan, who was falsely accused of sexual molestation, resulting in termination and a destroyed reputation.  As pointed out by friend of Cato and Cato Supreme Court Review contributor Hans Bader, however, the Department of Education is pushing a policy that would allow for more Sean Lanigans, even in cases not involving anything close to rape or molestation:
If the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights has its way, more teachers like him will end up being fired even if they are acquitted by a jury of any wrongdoing.  It sent a letter to school officials on April 4 ordering them to lower the burden of proof they use when determining whether students or staff are guilt...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893405</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 19:22:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893405</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who Is Really &quot;Bullying?&quot; - Academic Leaders and the Stifling of Critics of Conflicts of Interests</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4780272&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F05%2Fwho-is-really-bullying-academic-leaders.html</link>
            <description>Universities, which are supposed to discover and disseminate knowledge, ought to be the foremost defenders of free speech and a free press.&amp;nbsp; However, in the past decades, university executives have become notorious for trying to control speech that offends their political sensibilities (for numerous examples, see the FIRE - Foundation for Individual Rights in Education web-site.)&amp;nbsp; It seems that academic leaders get even more upset when&amp;nbsp;their or their faculties' conflicts of interest are criticized, as demonstrated by updates about&amp;nbsp;two important cases we have discussed.Columbia UniversityWe recently posted about reactions at the university to revelations in the movie &quot;Inside Job&quot; that the Dean of the Business School and one of its prominent professors failed to disclose ...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4780272</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 19:46:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4780272</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Seroquel Clinical Trial And Academic Freedom</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4759039&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FlVjvoT8rNwo%2F</link>
            <description>The sad case of Dan Markingson appears to have no end. The latest twist is playing out as an issue of academic freedom at the University of Minnesota where, seven years ago, researchers ran a clinical trial in which the 26-year-old participated. But the circumstances surrounding his participation and subsequent death led to widely publicized allegations the university put its own interests first.
One university researcher also consulted for AstraZeneca, which sells the drug and sponsored the study. And researchers were allegedly under pressure to bolster enrollment. These details emerged following a lawsuit filed by Markingson’s mother, who objected to her son’s participation because he was already mentally ill and possibly incompetent, but was enrolled anyway. 
Her lawsuit went nowher...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4759039</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:16:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4759039</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is The Vermont Data Mining Law Unconstitutional?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4747882&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F9c4NOuPTQQ8%2F</link>
            <description>The US Supreme Court tomorrow will review a highly controversial issue - the constitutionality of a Vermont law that restricts the sale of prescription drug info identifying prescribers and patients for commercial marketing purposes. The practice is known in the pharma world as data mining and has been building for some two decades ever since data was gathered by market research firms, but has since sparked heated arguments over free speech, health care costs and information privacy.
The information at issue includes the name of a prescribing physician, patient age and sex, the type and strength of each drug prescribed, and the date and location of prescription. Pharmacies, of course, are required by law to collect and maintain data about each prescription that is filled, and are allowed c...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4747882</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:16:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4747882</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4723790&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fqe59_xBEk1A%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Regulatory privilege is not consistent with competitive markets&amp;#8211;that&amp;#8217;s why Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac need reform.
Thank goodness the U.S. Supreme Court found that education tax credits are not consistent with the fictitious notion of a &amp;#8220;tax expenditure.&amp;#8221;
President Obama&amp;#8217;s budget plan is not consistent with either his own deficit commission&amp;#8217;s plan or the Constitution.
The modern &amp;#8220;Executive State&amp;#8221; is not consistent with Article II of the Constitution.
Cyberbullying laws are not consistent with the First Amendment and our concept of free speech:



Monday Links is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4723790</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:12:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4723790</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Even University Presidents Are Bound by the Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4704629&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSLtAhRW5GrY%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroFew could imagine a more troubling free speech and due process case than that of Hayden Barnes. 
Barnes, a student at Valdosta State University in Georgia, peacefully protested the planned construction of a $30 million campus parking garage that was the pet project of university president Ronald Zaccari.  A &amp;#8220;personally embarrassed&amp;#8221; Zaccari did not take kindly to that criticism and endeavored to retaliate against Barnes — ignoring longstanding legal precedent, the Valdosta State University Student Handbook (a legally binding contract), and the counsel of fellow administrators.  Zaccari even ordered staff to look into Barnes&amp;#8217;s academic records, his medical history, his religion, and his registration with the VSU Access Office!
The district court found th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4704629</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:54:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4704629</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Free Speech Belongs on Campuses Too</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4653314&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fb9sCNawlObs%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroSpeaking of free speech, last night I had an Obamacare panel at Widener University, which is currently having its own little speech-related brouhaha.  (Getting there was a bit of a hassle because I was held up at the Wilmington Amtrak station by Vice President Biden's entourage — but I didn't end up in a closet, so I guess it could have been worse.)
There are strange things afoot at the tiny Delaware law school, specifically to tenured professor Lawrence Connell, who also happens to be the adviser to the school's Federalist Society chapter. From the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education:
Widener University School of Law is attempting to fire longtime criminal law professor Lawrence Connell by charging him with dubious violations of the school's harassment code, s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4653314</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:27:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4653314</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>If the Government Gives Your Election Opponent More Money the More Money You Spend, It Burdens Your Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4653315&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFQQJv3QGBnk%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroYesterday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Arizona matching-public-campaign-funding case, McComish v. Bennett, spearheaded by our friends at the Goldwater Institute and the Institute for Justice.
Here's the background:  In 1998, after years of scandals ranging from governors being indicted to legislators taking bribes, Arizona passed the Citizens Clean Elections Act. This law was intended to “clean up” state politics by creating a system for publicly funding campaigns.  Participation in the public funding is not mandatory, however, and those who do not participate are subject to rules that match their “excess” private funds with disbursals to their opponent from the public fund. In short, if a privately funded candidate spends more than his publicly f...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4653315</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:26:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4653315</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Arrested for Pamphlets</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560242&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fnz1Cwthm9Uc%2F</link>
            <description>By Tim LynchThe feds are seeking to jail 78-year old Julian Heicklen for distributing pamphlets.  Heicklen knows that jurors are supposed to be able to vote their conscience in criminal cases -- so he distributes pamphlets on that subject near the federal courthouse.  The feds are evidently worried about the contents of those pamphlets and assert that Heicklen's conduct amounts to &quot;jury tampering.&quot;  But if Heicklen just gave the pamphlets to anyone and everyone, as he claims, without attempting to sway the outcome of any particular case, his conduct is free speech, plain and simple.   Heicklen should get a jury trial to fight the free speech violation -- since our Constitution says, &quot;In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by a...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560242</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2011 19:27:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560242</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Corporations Aren’t People But They Are (Legal) Persons</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4544947&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRmhvzKbuPbs%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroRecently, activist and filmmaker Annie Leonard released a video titled &quot;The Story of Citizens United v. FEC,&quot; an eight-and-a-half-minute criticism of last year’s Supreme Court case of the same name.
Well, sort of.
Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Lee Doren made his own video critique in response to Ms. Leonard’s offering, and points out quite clearly that Ms. Leonard doesn’t really deal with any actual constitutional problems in her position—essentially ignoring the decision and its rationale—and instead spends most of her time corporation bashing.
Lee was kind enough to cite, inter alia, a blogpost I wrote last year about what “corporate personhood” does and does not mean. If Ms. Leonard was going to ignore the decision, it may have at least served her wel...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4544947</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2011 17:40:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4544947</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Astellas Loses Lawsuit Against French Med Journal</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4540740&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FvYbfYVPhvKU%2F</link>
            <description>A French court has ruled that a critical article published by the Prescrire medical journal did not tarnish the reputation of the Protopic eczema ointment that is sold by Astellas Pharma, which sued the publication for denigrating its medication. The decision by the Paris tribunal was closely watched because the lawsuit raised concerns about the ability of medical journals in France, and perhaps elsewhere, to freely publish critiques that drugmakers may find offensive without fear of being taken to court. 
A 2009 article questioned the preventive use of the ointment and maintained the risk-benefit balance was negative. Astellas, which was seeking nearly $14,000 in damages, charged the piece was misleading and suggested the criticism was part of a smear campaign. Prescrire countered that &amp;#...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4540740</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:29:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4540740</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Defending the Undefendable</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4540556&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F7UEHXeeBcRY%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonFreedom requires tolerance. That principle will be put to the test today as Americans respond to the Supreme Court decision in Snyder v. Phelps.
As Ilya Shapiro first noted below, Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the Court, with a thoughtful dissent by Justice Samuel Alito, upheld the right of Rev. Fred Phelps and members of the Westboro Baptist Church to picket at military funerals, carrying signs that read “Thank God for Dead Soldiers,” “Fags Doom Nations,” “America is Doomed,” “Priests Rape Boys,” and “You’re Going to Hell.” It is a mark of our liberty that in most cases we defend even the most despicable speech. And in that we stand in stark contrast to much of the world.
In truth, we should also defend most (but not all) despicable actions ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4540556</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 17:24:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4540556</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Year After Citizens United, Campaign Finance Back at the Court</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4382748&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FoF7XF-mu_R0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs Caleb noted earlier, today marks the one-year anniversary of Citizens United, a case I first thought &amp;#8221;just&amp;#8221; concerned some weird regulation of pay-per-view movies, but turned out to be about asserted government power to ban political speech — including books and TV commercials — simply because the speaker was not one individual but a group (in corporate or or other associational form).  See also this op-ed by ACLU lawyer Joel Gora.
Roger similarly noted the continuing discussion in Congress and elsewhere about the public financing of elections.  As it turns out, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to such a system, specifically Arizona&amp;#8217;s Clean Elections Act.  Brought by our friends at the Institute for Justice and the Goldwat...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4382748</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:10:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4382748</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Citizens United Turns One</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4382751&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FIlAXKrr0E2g%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. BrownThe Supreme Court majority in Citizens United asserted plainly that the federal government&amp;#8217;s powers are few and defined in the realm of political speech. The decision has since been cast as one that does little more than give &amp;#8220;corporations and unions the freedom to spend as much as they like to support or attack candidates.&amp;#8221; Of course, the stakes were far higher. As the government&amp;#8217;s attorney asserted during the initial oral argument, the Federal Election Commission retained the authority to ban the sale of certain books (e-books included) in the weeks leading up to an election, a fact opponents of Citizens United rarely mention.
Shortly after that oral argument, Austin Bragg and I made a short video with Steve Simpson of the Institute for Justice, A...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4382751</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 15:44:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4382751</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Supreme Court Reviews Data Mining &amp; Free Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4322690&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FUjxdBU3b7R8%2F</link>
            <description>After several years of courtroom battles, the US Supreme Court has agreed to review whether laws that ban data mining - specifically, the sale of prescription drug info that identifies prescribers and patients for commercial marketing purposes - are unconstitutional (see this).
The move, which is not surprising, comes after conflicting rulings issued by different federal appeals courts. Last November, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit shot down a Vermont law after deciding it violated the First Amendment right to free speech (see here). Previously, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld similar statutes passed by Maine and New Hampshire (read this).
The challenges to the state laws were made by three healthcare research firms - IMS Health, SDI, Wolters Kluwer hea...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4322690</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 23:10:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4322690</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Astellas Sues French Medical Journal Over Article</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4318545&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F0gDxfTnIjKY%2F</link>
            <description>Here is an interesting development: Astellas Pharma has filed a lawsuit against Prescrire, a medical journal that is published by a non-profit organization, for publishing articles the drugmaker maintains has tarnished the reputation of its Protopic ointment used to treat eczema.
An article run last year questioned the preventive use of the ointment and maintained the risk-benefit balance was negative. An Astellas spokeswoman writes us to say that the drugmaker believes the article is &amp;#8220;misleading.&amp;#8221; The magazine counters that &amp;#8220;freedom of expression and exercise of freedom of criticism are at stake,&amp;#8221; according to Le Figaro), which also reported the drugmaker believes the criticism is part of a smear campaign. Prescrire has run several articles, actually, about the oin...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4318545</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:03:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4318545</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>It Turns Out You Can Indeed Criticize the Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4241707&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FRUzEnHdekPU%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs I wrote almost exactly a year ago, my friend Mark Sigmon filed a case on behalf of the ACLU seeking to prohibit a town in North Carolina from enforcing its sign ordinance against a man who painted &amp;#8220;Screwed by the Town of Cary&amp;#8221; on the side of his house.  Well, yesterday, the federal district court granted the plaintiff David Bowden summary judgment and entered a permanent injunction against the town. 
The court concluded that the sign ordinance was content-based under the First Amendment because it required more than a perfunctory inquiry into the content of signs in order to determine whether the ordinance would apply.  For example, the ordinance required the town to determine whether something was a &amp;#8220;work of art,&amp;#8221; a &amp;#8220;holiday message,&amp;...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4241707</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 17:50:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4241707</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is Wikileaks Libertarian?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4233165&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FddDFw1rSyb0%2F</link>
            <description>By Malou InnocentIn response to Wikileaks&amp;#8217; complaints that Amazon.com will no longer host the whisteblower site&amp;#8217;s activities, Chris Moody, over at the Daily Caller, writes:
Unfortunately for WikiLeaks’ argument, Amazon is a private company that can legally sever ties with anyone it wants. If anything, the company is exercising its right to free speech and association by choosing not to work with another independent organization.
That&amp;#8217;s correct, though I would add that it was Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, who bullied Amazon into cutting Wikileaks from its server. Thus, it was partially government coercion, not private consent, that severed a business relationship.
As an aside, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said in a ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4233165</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 17:56:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4233165</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Campaign Finance Crusade of The New York Times</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4197032&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVTRJXu0VioY%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonIn a barely coherent editorial this morning, The New York Times continues its decades-long crusade against free speech &amp;#8212; except its own, of course &amp;#8212; with yet another blast at the Supreme Court over its campaign finance decision last January in the Citizens United case. And again, the Times misstates the decision: it did not overturn “a century of precedent.” Perhaps its editorialists can be forgiven for that, even after nearly a year to get it right: after all, the president himself continues to misstate the decision, and that’s good enough for them.
Entitled “Our Constitutional Court,” the editorial’s main point seems to be that the Court is “redefining itself as a constitutional court.” That’s a curious charge. Many countries have “constituti...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4197032</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:35:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4197032</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Some People Think NPR Exhibits Bias</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4133670&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUvvg3G17Wzs%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonListening to NPR on the way into work, I twice heard a reporter refer to Meredith McGehee, a champion of (ahem) campaign finance reform, as a &amp;#8220;good-government lobbyist.&amp;#8221;
Got that?  If you disagree with McGehee&amp;#8217;s lobbying agenda — if, say, you think campaign finance reform is an unconstitutional attempt by the Left to restrict political speech that they don&amp;#8217;t like — then you are against making government better.
But did you catch the more subtle form of bias?  I maintain there is no such thing as good government. (Call it Cannon&amp;#8217;s First Law of Politics.)  And I&amp;#8217;m not alone.  &amp;#8221;Government, even in its best state,&amp;#8221; wrote Thomas Paine in Common Sense, &amp;#8220;is but a necessary evil.&amp;#8221;  Not good.  Less evil tha...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4133670</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 15:22:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4133670</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Advocates of Regulation Are to Charlie Brown as Washington, D.C., Is to Lucy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4074037&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FrZEK0U3MA7w%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThis morning on WNYC in New York City, I debated Josh Silver of the pro-Internet-regulation group Free Press. It was a healthy exchange of views, except for a few barbs and innuendos thrown by Silver, who is obviously frustrated by his group&amp;#8217;s lack of progress in seeking a &amp;#8220;government takeover of the Internet.&amp;#8221; (He wanted to debate in simple, ideological terms like that, so I indulge here.)
What was most interesting to me was how unsophisticated Silver is with respect to government and regulation. Take a look at his plea:
What we&amp;#8217;re asking for&amp;#8212;what we need are regulatory agencies that are not captured by industry and that actually act on behalf of the American public. And that&amp;#8217;s what they were created to do. The FCC&amp;#8212;1934, with the adve...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4074037</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:39:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4074037</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>GAO: HHS Imposed an “Unusual” Prior Restraint on Speech during ObamaCare Debate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4065346&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fb6jQh1eqyiw%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonDuring the debate over ObamaCare, the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services took issue with some of the things that some of the insurers participating in the Medicare Advantage program were telling their enrollees about the legislation.  The Government Accountability Office has just released a review of CMS&amp;#8217;s conduct in that episode:
Although CMS’s actions generally conformed to its policies and procedures, the September 21, 2009, memorandum instructing all MA organizations to discontinue communications on pending legislation while CMS conducted its investigation was unusual. Officials from the MA organizations and CMS regional offices that we interviewed told us they were unaware of CMS ever directing all MA organizations to immediately stop an activity...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4065346</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:39:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4065346</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Next Step for SpeechNow</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4036626&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6sUUi634sro%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe plaintiffs in the SpeechNow.org case have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to decide &amp;#8220;whether, under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment, the federal government may require an unincorporated association that makes only independent expenditures to register and report as a political committee.&amp;#8221;
You can read all about this important case here.
The Next Step for SpeechNow is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4036626</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 17:14:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4036626</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Another New Supreme Court Term, Another New Justice</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4027151&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVxq4Zjb-mkk%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday is the first Monday in October, the traditional start of the Supreme Court term.  While we have yet to see as many blockbuster constitutional cases on the docket as we did last term—which, despite the high profile 5-4 splits in McDonald v. Chicago and Citizens United actually produced fewer dissents than any in recent memory—we do look forward to:

Two big free speech challenges, one over a statute prohibiting the sale of violent video games to minors, another the offensive protesting of a fallen soldier’s funeral;
An Establishment Clause lawsuit against Arizona’s tax credit for private tuition funds (an alternative to educational voucher programs);
Regulatory federalism (or “preemption”) cases involving:

safety standards for seatbelts;
an Arizona statute...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4027151</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:06:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4027151</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sebelius: Anonymous Political Speech ‘Dangerous’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4022899&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtXeNkujL5UU%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonIn all of Washington, is there a greater enemy of free speech than Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius?

Her department is forcing millions of Americans to finance speech that they oppose, by using taxpayer dollars to broadcast (misleading) television ads that promote ObamaCare.
She is using the powers granted her under ObamaCare to threaten insurers with bankruptcy if they publicly disagree with her about the law&amp;#8217;s cost.
Now, she is decrying the growth of anonymous political speech in congressional campaigns.

Would that coerced speech, or government suppression of speech, troubled her as much as anonymous speech.
Sebelius: Anonymous Political Speech &amp;#8216;Dangerous&amp;#8217; is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4022899</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2010 14:46:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4022899</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>President Obama’s Speech Czar</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3987043&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBMKy5RTSVsM%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonPresident Obama&amp;#8217;s Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius is still threatening to bankrupt insurance companies who tell their customers that ObamaCare&amp;#8216;s mandates will increase premiums by more than 2 percent, even though her department&amp;#8217;s projections show that, starting this week, just one of the law&amp;#8217;s new mandates will increase some premiums by nearly 7 percent.
In a CBS News story last week, Sebelius tried to defend those indefensible threats:
But don&amp;#8217;t the insurance companies have a right to make their own analyses and claims to their customers?
&amp;#8220;Absolutely, they have a right to communicate with their customers,&amp;#8221; replied HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. &amp;#8220;We just want to make sure that communication is as...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3987043</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:20:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3987043</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Clean Elections Act Dirties the First Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3980814&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_Ka9_i5F_44%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroIn 1998, after years of scandals ranging from governors being indicted to legislators taking bribes, Arizona passed the Citizens Clean Elections Act. This law was intended to &amp;#8220;clean up&amp;#8221; state politics by creating a system for publicly funding campaigns.
Participation in the public funding is not mandatory, however, and those who do not participate are subject to rules that match their &amp;#8220;excess&amp;#8221; private funds with disbursals to their opponent from the public fund. In short, if a privately funded candidate spends more than his publicly funded opponent, then the publicly funded candidate receives public &amp;#8220;matching funds.&amp;#8221;
Whatever the motivations behind the law, the effects have been to significantly chill political speech. Indeed, ample eviden...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3980814</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 15:49:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3980814</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What If Cuccinelli Had Sent that Letter to Planned Parenthood?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3965393&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVNx7y-rBzqI%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThe following analogy may help to explain why everyone should be troubled by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius&amp;#8217; efforts to intimidate insurance companies who say unflattering things about ObamaCare.
Last month, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R), issued an opinion that state regulatory boards already have the authority to impose additional regulations on abortion clinics.  Critics pounced, claiming that the measure could shut down 17 of the state&amp;#8217;s 21 clinics. What if Cuccinelli responded with a letter threatening to investigate clinics that &amp;#8220;misinform&amp;#8221; the public about the costs of such regulation? (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3965393</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:52:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3965393</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Secretary Sebelius Slips on the Brass Knuckles</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3957897&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDKojA3KM-8w%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThis week saw more bad news for ObamaCare.  So the Obama administration slipped on the brass knuckles.
Last week brought news that health insurance premiums grew by a smaller increment in 2010 than in any of the past 10 years.  On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that ObamaCare appears to be turning that around:
Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats&amp;#8217; efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections. Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators.
Th...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3957897</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 20:32:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3957897</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Internet Censorship</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3942776&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FL8Ehoyf2UkU%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperOn August 24th, the Attorneys General of 17 states sent a letter [PDF] to the founder and CEO of the Craigslist online platform, to &amp;#8220;request&amp;#8221; that they take down the &amp;#8220;Adult Services&amp;#8221; section of the site. The link to that section of the site now stands with a &amp;#8220;CENSORED&amp;#8221; label over the place where the link stood.
On the TechLiberationFront blog, Ryan Radia has a good write-up, including the legal protections Craigslist enjoys under federal law as a provider of an &amp;#8220;interactive computer service.&amp;#8221; The AGs undoubtedly know that could not directly shut down Craigslist. They wouldn&amp;#8217;t have a legal leg to stand on if they attacked the site for the behavior of its users. But they also know that publically badgering Craigslist can win ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3942776</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 11:06:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3942776</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;THE First Amendment Issue Of Our Time&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3790851&amp;cid=t_100562_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2010%2F07%2Ffirst-amendment-issue-of-our-time.html</link>
            <description>Senator Al Frankin speaking at Netroots. (Source: Graphictruth)</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3790851</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 02:30:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3790851</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Your Unfriendly Neighbourhood Conservative Movement</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3737202&amp;cid=t_100562_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2010%2F07%2Fyour-unfriendly-neighbourhood.html</link>
            <description>This should give you an insight into why the protection of free speech is so broad and sweeping in the US and Canada. If speech like this were illegal, you wouldn't know what sort of ideas people like this supported - and you might not realize that such people were being courted and pandered to by less indiscreet conservatives. Hell, you might just think such people who say they are Christians and Conservatives actually knew what those words mean. (Source: Graphictruth)</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3737202</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 20:59:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3737202</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Doctor Suing For Bad Ratings Online</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3733086&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fdoctor-suing-for-bad-ratings-online%2F2010.07.07</link>
            <description>I must say I think Dr. Kimberly Henry, cosmetic surgeon, has made a big professional mistake. She has filed a lawsuit to stop online reviewers from badmouthing her on the Internet. She is seeking injunctions against at least 12 reviewers from sites such as Yelp.com and DoctorScorecard.com. Dr. Henry claims libel and defamation, invasion of privacy and interference with prospective economic advantage and is seeking $1million in general damages and $1million in special damages, etc.
Now I don&amp;#8217;t know Dr. Henry nor do I know of her plastic surgery technique. I don&amp;#8217;t know who the disgruntled patients are or if they are unfairly targeting her. What I do know is that the Internet is here to stay and there&amp;#8217;s no place to hide if you don&amp;#8217;t provide excellent customer ser...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3733086</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 16:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3733086</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Kagan Contra Kagan?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3710550&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fs9FY7MJ0UQU%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe Center for Competitive Politics has sponsored an analysis by Allison Hayward of Elena Kagan&amp;#8217;s writings on campaign finance regulation. It should be read widely, not least by the Senators trying to discern her fitness for the Court. Here&amp;#8217;s a taste of Allison&amp;#8217;s analysis:
In Kagan’s 1996 article, Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine, she “explicitly recognized that ‘campaign finance laws… easily can serve as incumbent-protection devices’ and when applied to certain speakers ‘the danger of illicit motive becomes even greater.&amp;#8217; It is impossible to square Kagan’s analysis in this article with her recent comments that the Supreme Court should have deferred to Congress in Citizens United...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3710550</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 14:43:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3710550</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Having Public Colleges Means Limiting Freedom</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3706654&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4UrRkZz_iyg%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyWhile we&amp;#8217;re all shooting off our guns in celebration of good Supreme Court news, Roger has reported the blow to liberty dealt by the Court&amp;#8217;s lower-profile CLS v. Martinez decision. I won&amp;#8217;t elaborate on whether the Court made the right decision &amp;#8212; on that I stand with Roger (and Alito, Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas). I just want to add one thing about the root problem in the CLS case: You can&amp;#8217;t have both taxpayer funding of higher education and full freedom. As Ilya Shapiro and I wrote in an April op-ed about the case:
It is impossible to reconcile free speech with governmentally compelled support of speech. Just as public colleges cannot choose both which student groups to fund and avoid discrimination, they cannot pay a professor without priv...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3706654</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 18:52:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3706654</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Our Fellows in the News</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3679749&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYr-oAg8vl0w%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazCato fellows Nat Hentoff and Penn Jillette have just been profiled in major publications &amp;#8212; Hentoff in the New York Times and Penn in Vanity Fair. Warning: the Hentoff profile is mostly about jazz, and the Penn interview contains lots of four-letter words, obscene imagery, and harsh language about religion. So if you have a low tolerance for jazz or for obscenity and blasphemy, be forewarned. But it&amp;#8217;s no surprise that both of them talk a lot about the importance of free speech. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3679749</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:52:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3679749</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Oh, yes, let the people speak!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3671948&amp;cid=t_100562_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2010%2F06%2Foh-yes-let-people-speak.html</link>
            <description>I have been feeling overwhelmed by the flaming pools of stupid around me. and the amazingly poor job, it seems, of the media and the blogosphere in keeping the whackadoodle nutters out of polite company.Yeah, there's something of the &quot;back when I was a boy&quot; to all of this.When I took Journalism 101, there was a hard limit on the amount of nonsense that could go into a publication.&amp;nbsp;Speech was free, but printing that speech was expensive. Someone (not the writer, for the best one could hope for then was a basic&amp;nbsp;comprehension&amp;nbsp;of grammar and construction) had to&amp;nbsp;proofread, edit and typeset the speech, and then someone had to decide which was more important, the fifth paragraph, or the paid ad from a&amp;nbsp;neighbourhood&amp;nbsp;sandwich&amp;nbsp;shoppe. That paid ad is what made it ...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3671948</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:07:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3671948</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Problems Overturning Citizens United</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3652395&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FPhAmWAwWzLI%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesCongress has been trying to overturn the Citizens United decision for the past four months. (Citizens United invalidated bans on speech by groups taking a corporate form). Their effort — the DISCLOSE Act — now seems bogged down in the House of Representatives. The National Rifle Association argues that they should not have to disclose their small donors. The labor unions also have complaints:
Amaya Tune, a spokeswoman for the AFL-CIO, told Bloomberg this week that &amp;#8220;the final bill should treat corporations different than democratic organizations such as unions. We believe the legislation should counter the excessive and disproportionate influence by big business and guarantee effective disclosure of who is paying for what.&amp;#8221;
Here&amp;#8217;s the problem: The Supre...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3652395</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:08:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3652395</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Remember, the FCC Is Our National Censor II</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3621658&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjE7Biud9oeU%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperLast week, I referred obscurely to &amp;#8220;folks wanting to install the FCC as the Internet’s regulator,&amp;#8221; cautioning that this same Federal Communications Commission is our national censor.
A friendly correspondent points me to an article in Ars Technica about the demand for speech controls coming from the same groups that want the FCC to control the Internet&amp;#8217;s infrastructure, groups such as Free Press, the Media Access Project, and Common Cause.
Is there a parry to the charge that this is a demand for censorship? The signatories to the regulatory filing &amp;#8220;respectfully request[] that the FCC . . . inquire into the extent and effects of hate speech in media, and explore possible non-regulatory ways to counteract its negative impacts.&amp;#8221;
The filing doe...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3621658</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 17:43:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3621658</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Libertarianism Hits the Big Time</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3607483&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJZDMtZXK4H8%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazMichael Crowley, late of the New Republic and now with Time magazine, writes thoughtfully about Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and libertarianism. Crowley notes that Rand Paul, &amp;#8220;more politically flexible than his father,&amp;#8221; has plenty of unlibertarian positions. But both of them are tapping into a real strain in contemporary politics:
But he, like his father, also knows well that a genuine libertarian impulse is astir in America&amp;#8230;. polls show an uptick in both social permissiveness and skepticism of government intervention&amp;#8230;.[Ron Paul] has already waited a long time — and it appears the country is moving his way.
This is a current trend, but it&amp;#8217;s also deeply rooted in the American political culture. As David Kirby and I wrote in &amp;#8220;The Libertarian Vote&amp;#...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3607483</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 16:17:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3607483</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Initial Kagan Critiques Miss the (First Amendment) Point</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3552224&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBv23ItJ9-p8%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroAs I&amp;#8217;ve been re-reading Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan&amp;#8217;s publications &amp;#8212; of which there are surprisingly few for someone of her achievements and reputation &amp;#8212; I&amp;#8217;ve had half an eye on the TV punditry.  It seems that the leading critique from both the right (e.g., Fox News, Senator Jon Kyl &amp;#8212; who&amp;#8217;s usually excellent on these things) and extreme left (e.g., Jane Hamsher) is that Kagan doesn&amp;#8217;t have judicial experience. 
This just completely misses the point.  As a solicitor general (the &amp;#8220;Tenth Justice&amp;#8221;) and former dean of Harvard Law &amp;#8212; where she did a magnificent job and gained the respect of scholars from across the political spectrum &amp;#8212; not to mention senior roles in the Clinton White House, teaching ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3552224</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 10 May 2010 19:29:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3552224</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Commercial Free Speech Or Off-Label Marketing?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3508446&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F5kplgLzalRM%2F</link>
            <description>Back in 2002, Orphan Medical obtained FDA approval to market its Xyrem drug to treat cataplexy, which is a sudden loss of muscle tone associated with narcolepsy, although docs soon began prescribing the med to treat other conditions. And Alfred Caronia, a former Orphan sales exec, was convicted three years later of encouraging docs to engage in off-label usage. 
However, the Washington Legal Foundation, which has long been active in championing off-label promotion as a form of commercial free speech, has filed a brief urging the US Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit to overturn Caronia&amp;#8217;s conviction on the grounds that the &amp;#8220;First Amendment broadly protects the right of individuals to speak truthfully about off-label uses of FDA-approved products, even in a commercial contex...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3508446</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:36:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3508446</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Students Have the Right to Free Speech, Too</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3487040&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ft-LG2mluQe0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroA northern Texas school district attempted to banish all religious expression from its schools by prohibiting virtually all non-verbal student speech in any school-related context.  Officials used this broad policy to promote an anti-religious orthodoxy and root out any and all religious speech. The Supreme Court made clear, however, in its seminal school speech case, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, that students enjoy First Amendment rights, and that core political and religious speech cannot be suppressed without showing that the speech will &amp;#8220;materially and substantially disrupt&amp;#8221; the educational process.
Here, the Fifth Circuit upheld all of the district’s regulations and found that Tinker did not supply the relevant legal standar...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3487040</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:11:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3487040</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John Paul Stevens, Defender of High-Tech Freedom</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3456669&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnkONjUE--qc%2F</link>
            <description>By Timothy B. LeeI&amp;#8217;m saddened to hear of the retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens. Whatever you might say about his jurisprudence in other areas, one place where Justice Stevens really shined was in his defense of high-tech freedom.
Justice Stevens wrote the majority opinion in some of the most important high-tech cases of the last four decades. In other cases, he wrote important (and in some cases prescient) dissents. Through it all, he was a consistent voice for freedom of expression and the freedom to innovate. His accomplishments include:

Free speech: Justice Stevens wrote the majority decision in ACLU v. Reno, the decision that struck down the infamous Communications Decency Act and clearly established that the First Amendment applies to the Internet. In the 13 years since t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3456669</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 20:57:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3456669</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Free Speech in Canada</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3408363&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FuwkVqhiO5Nc%2F</link>
            <description>By David RittgersFree speech isn’t exactly free in Canada, and even Glenn Greenwald and Mark Steyn agree on this point. When conservative commentator Ann Coulter (who can be uncivil, but shouldn’t be muzzled by the state for it) tried to give a speech at the University of Ottawa, she was warned by the political correctness police not to hurt anyone’s feelings:
I would, however, like to inform you, or perhaps remind you, that our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or &amp;#8220;free speech&amp;#8221;) in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here.
You will realize that Canadian...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3408363</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2010 19:57:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3408363</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Google Execs Convicted in Italy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3306827&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FH3xEAo5Exig%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperGoogle executives who had nothing to do with the creation, uploading, review, or display of a video have been criminally convicted in Italy for its brief appearance on a Google site.
The video, which showed Italian children taunting an autistic schoolmate, was promptly taken down after Italian authorities notified Google. The company assisted the authorities in locating the girl who uploaded it, according to Google&amp;#8217;s account. (Her subsequent conviction makes it safe to assume that Google was cooperating with a criminal investigation as required by Italian law.) But four Google employees were charged with criminal defamation and failure to comply with the Italian privacy code.
That can&amp;#8217;t happen here&amp;#8212;unless we let it happen here.
This is a good time to revi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3306827</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 19:40:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3306827</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Democracy against Free Speech?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3283520&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyKk76th22OY%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesA new poll from Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that most respondents oppose the recent Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. Just over 70 percent of those polled want to reinstate the unconstitutional restrictions. The questions asked may be found here.
Sean Parnell asks whether the wording of the questions in this poll drove the results. William McGinley shares Parnell’s concerns and suggests some alternative questions for future polling.
I was not surprised by the result. Polls have long found that substantial majorities support something called “campaign finance reform.” Over two years ago, a poll found that 71 percent of Americans wanted to limit corporate and union spending on campaigns. 62 percent also supported limiting the amount of money a p...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3283520</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:15:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3283520</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>When Individuals Form Corporations, They Don’t Lose Their Rights</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3235823&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FO83bixU3X2c%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThe blogosphere has been abuzz on the heels of the Supreme Court’s landmark Citizens United opinion.  Hysteric criticisms of the speculative changes to our political landscape aside &amp;#8212; including the President’s misstatements in the State of the Union &amp;#8212; one of the most common and oft-repeated criticisms is that the Constitution does not protect corporations. Several “reform” groups have even drafted and circulated constitutional amendments to address this concern.
This line of attack demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of both the nature of corporations and the freedoms protected by the Constitution, which is exemplified by the facile charge that “corporations aren’t human beings.”
Well of course they aren’t — but that’s constitutionall...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3235823</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:45:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3235823</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Trial Over Botox In Children With Cerebral Palsy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3228006&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fa5Imb0EpOYg%2F</link>
            <description>A woman is suing Allergan, which makes Botox, because she believes the injectable cosmetic med led to the death of her seven-year-old daughter. Why? Botox was used to treat muscle spasms resulting from cerebral palsy, and Dee Spears charges Allergan wrongfully promoted untested and off-label uses, misrepresented Botox safety record, and failed to adequately warn health care providers of all the known risks of the product, according to court documents.
At issue is the safety of the drug, especially in higher doses used to treat kids with cerebral palsy. Kristen Spears died in 2007 of respiratory failure and pneumonia, according to The Los Angeles Times, which adds that experts hired by her mom say Botox weakened muscles that controlled her breathing and swallowing, leading to respiratory fa...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3228006</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:04:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3228006</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Citizen United’s Concept of the U.S. Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3204838&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FIQdrGUApn48%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesThe Citizens United decision and the talk that has followed imply two different and incompatible ideas of the Constitution.
The majority in Citizens United believe that the U.S. Constitution establishes a government of limited and defined powers. They asked: “Does the Constitution give government the power to prohibit speech by corporations (and others)?” The First Amendment indicated the government did not have that power.
The critics of the Citizens United decision assume the Constitution created a government of  plenary powers with limited exceptions. They recognize that free speech for individuals is one such exception. But that exception is limited to natural people, not legal constructs. If there is no exception to the plenary power of government, the critics conc...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3204838</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:29:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3204838</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Secretary Clinton on Free Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3197607&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FlP3mrPh1dws%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperSecretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a major speech on Internet freedom today. The text has been posted on the State Department web site, and Adam Thierer has a review of it up on the TechLiberationFront blog.
As a signal to other governments, it was a good speech. It placed the United States government on the side of freedom movements around the world and extolled how technology empowers them.
From a domestic perspective, it was nothing special. References to the liberating power of the Internet were carefully caveated with cautions about online dangers that could justify government intrusion on the Internet. Secretary Clinton was particularly equivocal about online anonymity.
The irony, of course, was provided by the breaking news of the day: the Supreme Court&amp;#8217;s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3197607</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 02:38:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3197607</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thursday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3197611&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv_PjdAIck80%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
The back story behind the Citizens United free speech case. (Or if you don&amp;#8217;t have time to read about it, this short video clip explains it all.)


RomneyCare: Obama&amp;#8217;s OTHER Massachusetts problem.


Tim Geithner&amp;#8217;s lifelong love of bailouts.


How substantial and meaningful change can be brought to Haiti.


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Supreme Court Affirms First Amendment&amp;#8221; featuring John Samples. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3197611</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:01:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3197611</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Supreme Court Ruling on Hillary Movie Heralds Freer Speech for All of Us</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3193692&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F_TO11YwTO6I%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroToday the Supreme Court struck a major blow for free speech by correctly holding that government cannot try to &amp;#8220;level the political playing field&amp;#8221; by banning corporations from making independent campaign expenditures on films, books, or even campaign signs.
As Justice Kennedy said in announcing the opinion, &amp;#8220;if the First Amendment has any force, it prohibits jailing citizens for engaging in political speech.&amp;#8221;
While the Court has long upheld campaign finance regulations as a way to prevent corruption in elections, it has also repeated that equalizing speech is never a valid government interest.
After all, to make campaign spending equal, the government would have to prevent some people or groups from spending less than they wished. That is directly con...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3193692</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:29:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3193692</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blasphemy Laws Are an Admission of Failure</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3149028&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F8L35j48fnOc%2F</link>
            <description>By Jason KuznickiThe Washington Post feature &amp;#8220;On Faith&amp;#8221; today discusses Ireland&amp;#8217;s new, profoundly misguided blasphemy law. Blasphemers there can now be fined up to $35,000. That&amp;#8217;s a lot of money for a few little words.
Atheist Ireland is testing &amp;#8212; and protesting &amp;#8212; the law by publishing blasphemous quotations like the following:
&amp;#8220;Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of w...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3149028</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:27:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3149028</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Adding Free Speech Insult to Property Rights Injury</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3067019&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQ33-cPFMQ3E%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroMy friend and former law firm colleague Mark Sigmon &amp;#8212; who co-authored Cato&amp;#8217;s brief in the New Haven firefighters case &amp;#8212; is representing a man facing daily fines for displaying a large political message on his house.
David Bowden was upset about the way he had been treated by the town of Cary, NC, regarding damage to his property during a road-widening project.  This past July, Bowden hired someone to paint &amp;#8220;Screwed By The Town of Cary&amp;#8221; on the front of his house.  A few weeks ago, the town gave Bowden seven days to remove the sign or face daily fines &amp;#8212; $100 for the first day, $250 for the second, $500 for each subsequent day &amp;#8211; for violating a local sign ordinance. That&amp;#8217;s when Mark, who&amp;#8217;s affiliated with the ACL...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3067019</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:02:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3067019</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No Free Speech for Comparative Effectiveness Researchers?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3026636&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F11%2Fno-free-speech-for-comparative.html</link>
            <description>We have repeatedly argued why comparative effectiveness research, under ideal circumstances, would be a good idea.&amp;nbsp; As I said before:Physicians spend a lot of time trying to figure out the best treatments for particular patients' problems. Doing so is often hard. In many situations, there are many plausible treatments, but the trick is picking the one most likely to do the most good and least harm for a particular patient. Ideally, this is where evidence based medicine comes in. But the biggest problem with using the EBM approach is that often the best available evidence does not help much. In particular, for many clinical problems, and for many sorts of patients, no one has ever done a good quality study that compares the plausible treatments for those problems and those patients. Wh...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3026636</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:22:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3026636</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The New Threats to Free Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2999508&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FA4DDT0pXBF4%2F</link>
            <description>In a new Policy Analysis, Cato Research Fellow Jason Kuznicki examines the ongoing threats to free speech both at home and around the world, from hate-speech laws in the United Kingdom and Canada and university speech codes in the United States, to the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam:
The result is not more happiness, but a race to the bottom, in which aggrieved groups compete endlessly with one another for a slice of government power. Philosopher Robert Nozick once observed that utilitarianism is hard-pressed to banish what he termed utility monsters—that is, individuals who take inordinate satisfaction from acts that displease others. Arguing about who hurt whose feelings worse, and about who needs more soothing than whom, seems designed to discover—or create—utility mon...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2999508</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:26:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2999508</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2999509&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FC5rpiwLoIPw%2F</link>
            <description>Report: New threats to free speech.


The politics behind the health care overhaul.


Mass corruption in Afghanistan. Malou Innocent: &amp;#8220;Washington has already surged into Afghanistan once this year. The United States should not spend more American blood and more of its ever-diminishing financial resources to prop up Karzai&amp;#8217;s ineffectual regime.&amp;#8221;


A government takeover of health care is not pro-choice &amp;#8212; for anyone: &amp;#8220;Whatever your views on abortion, the fight over abortion in the Obama health plan illustrates perfectly why government should stay out of health care. When the government subsidizes health care, anything you do with that money becomes the voters&amp;#8217; business. And rather than allow for choice between different ways of doing things, the government ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2999509</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:17:20 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2999509</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Lesson for Young Journalists, Courtesy of Justice Kennedy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2984776&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FpHee0vkd438%2F</link>
            <description>A high school newspaper in Manhattan recently added a new and prestigious editor to its staff: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.  Adam Liptak of the New York Times reports:
It turns out that Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, widely regarded as one of the court’s most vigilant defenders of First Amendment values, had provided the newspaper, The Daltonian, with a lesson about journalistic independence. Justice Kennedy’s office had insisted on approving any article about a talk he gave to an assembly of Dalton high school students on Oct. 28.
Kathleen Arberg, the court’s public information officer, said Justice Kennedy’s office had made the request to make sure the quotations attributed to him were accurate.
The justice’s office received a draft of the proposed article on Monday and...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2984776</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:30:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2984776</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Right to Speak in Non-Government-Approved Ways</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2973908&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhyiiIStODJc%2F</link>
            <description>School officials denied student Pete Palmer the right to wear a shirt supporting John Edwards&amp;#8217;s presidential campaign at his Dallas-area high school. They cited the district&amp;#8217;s dress code, which prohibited messages on student clothing except for those that supported school activities or district-approved organizations, clubs or teams.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed with the school district that this was a reasonable &amp;#8220;time, place and manner&amp;#8221; speech restriction. Applying the test from United States v. O&amp;#8217;Brien, the court found that the dress code was content- and viewpoint-neutral, and served an important governmental purpose. Palmer now seeks Supreme Court review, citing seemingly contradictory precedents from the Second and Third Circuits...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2973908</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:43:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2973908</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama, International Law, and Free Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2958819&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiElC8kbJDPs%2F</link>
            <description>Stuart Taylor has a very good article this week about the Obama administration, international law, and free speech.  This excerpt begins with a quote from Harold Koh, Obama&amp;#8217;s top lawyer at the State Department:
&amp;#8220;Our exceptional free-speech tradition can cause problems abroad, as, for example, may occur when hate speech is disseminated over the Internet.&amp;#8221; The Supreme Court, suggested Koh &amp;#8212; then a professor at Yale Law School &amp;#8212; &amp;#8220;can moderate these conflicts by applying more consistently the transnationalist approach to judicial interpretation&amp;#8221; that he espouses.
Translation: Transnational law may sometimes trump the established interpretation of the First Amendment. This is the clear meaning of Koh&amp;#8217;s writings, although he implied otherwise duri...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2958819</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:42:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2958819</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Some Thoughts on the New Surveillance</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2939274&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmHspvR8s3dw%2F</link>
            <description>Last night I spoke at &amp;#8220;The Little Idea,&amp;#8221; a mini-lecture series launched in New York by Ari Melber of The Nation and now starting up here in D.C., on the incredibly civilized premise that, instead of some interminable panel that culminates in a series of audience monologues-disguised-as-questions, it&amp;#8217;s much more appealing to have a speaker give a ten-minute spiel, sort of as a prompt for discussion, and then chat with the crowd over drinks.
I&amp;#8217;d sketched out a rather longer version of my remarks in advance just to make sure I had my main ideas clear, and so I&amp;#8217;ll post them here, as a sort of preview of a rather longer and more formal paper on 21st century surveillance and privacy that I&amp;#8217;m working on. Since ten-minute talks don&amp;#8217;t accommodate footnotes ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2939274</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:07:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2939274</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Attorney General Tries to Silence School Choice Ad</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2934659&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6e7y8qitCgw%2F</link>
            <description>This, finally, is too much: Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States, walked up to former DC Councilman Kevin Chavous at an event and told him to pull an ad criticizing the administration for its opposition to the DC school voucher program. The Attorney General of the United States!
This is as outrageous and shameful as it is consistent with other administration hostilities toward free speech (see also here) and freedom of the press.
There is a deep revulsion to such behavior in this country. It is not a Republican or a Democratic revulsion, it is an American one. Obama administration officials seem not to understand that, but voters will help them get the message the next time they go to the polls. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2934659</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:29:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2934659</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Fact-checking Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2927289&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv4NwTDrOfkc%2F</link>
            <description>This report from USA Today tells the story of several patients who were harassed and threatened by federal agents. Excerpt:  &amp;#8221;In August 2002, federal agents seized six plants from [Diane] Monson&amp;#8217;s home and destroyed them.&amp;#8221;
This report from the San Francisco Chronicle tells the story of Bryan Epis and Ed Rosenthal.  Both men, in separate incidents, were raided, arrested, and prosecuted by federal officials.  The feds called them &amp;#8220;drug dealers.&amp;#8221;  When the cases came to trial, both men were eager to inform their juries about the actual circumstances surrounding their cases&amp;#8211;but they were not allowed to convey those circumstances to jurors.  Federal prosecutors insisted that information concerning the medical aspect of marijuana was &amp;#8220;irrele...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2927289</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:32:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2927289</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>One Nation Under Double Jeopardy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2920161&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FBKljAOERYaE%2F</link>
            <description>The Senate is about to vote on Defense Department funding with an expanded federal &amp;#8220;hate crimes&amp;#8221; bill. This well-intentioned piece of legislation threatens to make violations of the fundamental right against Double Jeopardy a routine practice, as federal courts will now have the power to re-prosecute defendants for what are traditionally state crimes.
The House removed language that the Senate put in place to ensure that the &amp;#8220;hate crimes&amp;#8221; provisions did not stretch to encompass free speech, threatening to attach criminal liability to core rights of free expression.
This expansion of federal jurisdiction guarantees that high profile cases will be retried until a guilty verdict is obtained to satisfy political factions. This politicization of justice will only harm ou...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2920161</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:26:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2920161</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>NYT: We Don’t Deserve First Amendment Protection!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2828182&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjJGQste2RS8%2F</link>
            <description>I assume others have pointed this out already, but there&amp;#8217;s something very odd about a Tuesday editorial in The New York Times arguing that campaign finance regulations that stifle the political speech of corporations must be upheld in the Citizens United case currently under consideration before the Supreme Court:
The question at the heart of one of the biggest Supreme Court cases this year is simple: What constitutional rights should corporations have? To us, as well as many legal scholars, former justices and, indeed, drafters of the Constitution, the answer is that their rights should be quite limited — far less than those of people.
In that case, surely it&amp;#8217;s time to revisit some of the 20th century&amp;#8217;s seminal free speech rulings. The idea that public figures cannot u...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2828182</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:42:43 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2828182</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Free Speech in Online Communities: The Delusion of Entitlement</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2814767&amp;cid=t_100562_180_f&amp;fid=38613&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stevepavlina.com%2Fblog%2F2009%2F09%2Ffree-speech-in-online-communities-the-delusion-of-entitlement%2F</link>
            <description>Back in 2004 and 2005 when people asked me what I did for a living, I&amp;#8217;d tell them I was a blogger. I got a lot of blank stares and invariably had to explain what a blog was. After that, people would lower their eyes, figuring that I was obviously on some ridiculous dead-end path with my &amp;#8220;online diary.&amp;#8221;
In January 2006 I gave a 90-minute Power Point presentation to explain blogging to a group of about 60 speakers in Las Vegas. By that time I was earning a decent sustainable living from blogging (a few thousand dollars a month). I predicted that blogs would be everywhere within a few years. That wasn&amp;#8217;t a difficult prediction to make since Technorati was reporting such phenomenal growth month after month with no end in sight. You didn&amp;#8217;t have to be particularly pr...</description>
            <author>Steve Pavlina's Personal Development Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2814767</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:33:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2814767</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘We Don’t Put Our First Amendment Rights In the Hands of FEC Bureaucrats’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2782012&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FH6_9KADeCQ4%2F</link>
            <description>I (and several colleagues) have blogged before about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the latest campaign finance case, which was argued this morning at the Supreme Court.  The case is about much more than whether a corporation can release a movie about a political candidate during an election campaign.  Indeed, it goes to the very heart of the First Amendment, which was specifically created to protect political speech—the kind most in danger of being censored by politicians looking to limit the appeal of threatening candidates and ideas.
After all, hard-hitting political speech is something the First Amendment&amp;#8217;s authors experienced firsthand.  They knew very well what they were doing in choosing free and vigorous debate over government-filtered pablum.  Moreove...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2782012</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 21:15:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2782012</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Citizens United and Supreme Court Precedent</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2774609&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnYufE6O6ARI%2F</link>
            <description>My old friend E. J. Dionne of the Washington Post writes that the Citizens United v. FEC rehearing on Wednesday is &amp;#8220;A Test Case for Roberts.&amp;#8221; Because, you see, Chief Justice John Roberts said in his confirmation hearings that &amp;#8220;it is a jolt to the legal system when you overrule a precedent. Precedent plays an important role in promoting stability and evenhandedness. It is not enough &amp;#8212; and the court has emphasized this on several occasions &amp;#8212; it is not enough that you may think the prior decision was wrongly decided.&amp;#8221;
Dionne says that if Roberts and the Court overturn the precedents that seem to point to banning a movie with a political agenda because it was produced by a nonprofit corporation, &amp;#8220;he will unleash havoc in our political system and great...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2774609</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:50:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2774609</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Hillary: The Movie</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2751885&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDwgvnW8m64Y%2F</link>
            <description>The Supreme Court is soon to hear a case that may drastically roll back campaign finance regulation in the United States:
The case involves “Hillary: The Movie,” a mix of advocacy journalism and political commentary that is a relentlessly negative look at Mrs. Clinton’s character and career. The documentary was made by a conservative advocacy group called Citizens United, which lost a lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission seeking permission to distribute it on a video-on-demand service. The film is available on the Internet and on DVD. The issue was that the McCain-Feingold law bans corporate money being used for electioneering.
The right position for the Court is that McCain-Feingold, and all other campaign finance regulation, constitutes unconstitutional limitation on fre...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2751885</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:24:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2751885</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>600 Billion Data Points Per Day? It’s Time to Restore the Fourth Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2709113&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FXCwbsfeOA9o%2F</link>
            <description>Jeff Jonas has published an important post: &amp;#8220;Your Movements Speak for Themselves: Space-Time Travel Data is Analytic Super-Food!&amp;#8221;
More than you probably realize, your mobile device is a digital sensor, creating records of your whereabouts and movements:
Mobile devices in America are generating something like 600 billion geo-spatially tagged transactions per day. Every call, text message, email and data transfer handled by your mobile device creates a transaction with your space-time coordinate (to roughly 60 meters accuracy if there are three cell towers in range), whether you have GPS or not. Got a Blackberry? Every few minutes, it sends a heartbeat, creating a transaction whether you are using the phone or not. If the device is GPS-enabled and you’re using a location-based ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2709113</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:21:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2709113</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Chance to Rethink How We Regulate Political Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2667399&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQTAYu_EFm5k%2F</link>
            <description>At the March 24 argument in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the U.S. government argued that Section 203 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (otherwise known as McCain-Feingold) permits the FEC to ban corporations, including ideological nonprofits like Citizens United, from making independent expenditures on films, books, or even “a sign held up in Lafayette Park.”  The jurisprudential justification for this extraordinary and shockingly expansive view of the government’s power to suppress political speech traces to the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce.  In Austin, the Court held that Michigan had a compelling state interest in banning political speech funded with wealth accumulated using the corporate form.  Though ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2667399</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 16:43:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2667399</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Do You Think We Could Cut Costs In Our Health Care System?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2626190&amp;cid=t_100562_129_f&amp;fid=36035&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.everydayhealth.com%2Fblog%2Flife-with-chronic-pain%2Fhow-do-you-think-we-could-cut-costs-in-our-health-care-system%2F</link>
            <description>As most of you who read this blog on a regular basis know, I have been serving on an online panel for The Washington Post regarding this whole subject of changing or improving health care in our country. It’s a huge subject and today I don’t want to get lost in the muck and mire of trying to sludge through this whole issue. I, also, do not want to turn this blog, which I started to address living with chronic pain, to become a political one. Neither do I want it to be a religious one, a sexist one or a reality TV show; there is enough reality in living with daily pain. Everyone is welcome here and I don’t want to do anything that will estrange anyone who needs to visit us. That said, however, I am a resolute believer in free speech
I spend a great deal of my limited energy writing fo...</description>
            <author>Life with Chronic Pain</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2626190</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 16:18:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2626190</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Blogger That Dares Not Speak His University's Name</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2570444&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F07%2Fblogger-that-dares-not-speak-his.html</link>
            <description>Dr Douglas Bremner is a Professor of Psychiatry and Radiology at Emory University, and Director of the University's Clinical Neuroscience Research Unit. He has also written a book critical of the pharmaceutical industry (Before You Take That Pill), and writes a blog (also called Before You Take That Pill) that is also skeptical about certain aspects of current psychiatric dogma. Inside Higher Education reported that Emory University can apparently no longer bear to have its name mentioned in Dr Bremner's blog:Emory University has been accused repeatedly over the last year of looking the other way while one of its prominent physicians built extremely close ties to the pharmaceutical industry and -- critics charge -- failed to adequately report those ties as required by university and federa...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2570444</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 19:26:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2570444</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Roberts Revolution to Come</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2561215&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FG6UeB8BUL3c%2F</link>
            <description>As I mentioned yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court surprised many people by ordering a reargument in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Specifically, the Court called for the parties to the case to address the question of overruling Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce.
The Court decided Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce in 1989.  The state of Michigan had prohibited corporations from spending money on electoral speech. In the case in question, the Chamber of Commerce wished to pay for an advertisement backing a candidate for the House of Representatives. The Chamber took this action on its own and not in tandem with the candidate or his party.  Paying for the ad was a felony under Michigan law.
A majority of the Court in 1989 said the Michigan law did not v...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2561215</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:22:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2561215</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Carrie Prejean, the Also-ran Queen</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2415655&amp;cid=t_100562_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2009%2F05%2Fcarrie-prejean-also-ran-queen.html</link>
            <description>I've been taking a little vacation from internet news the last while, because, well, I was starting to burn out. One response was to experiment with a more graphic approach to graphictruths.But that meant that all I got was television pop-culture. Well, I'm late to the gate with the Peroxide Christian Conservatism of Carrie Prejean, Also-Ran Queen for Miss Trump USA.But it seems that while the story ain't fresh, it's a great BIG pile of cultural carrion, and the Usual Vultures are far from reaching the bone.Palin defends Carrie Prejean Miss California USA                           from staunchusa Carrie Prejean news of the day! Sarah Palin is defending Carrie Prejean. “The liberal onslaught of malicious attacks against (Miss California) Carrie Prejean for expressing her opinion is despic...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2415655</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 18:17:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2415655</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Free Speech v. The Federal Election Commission</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2389673&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FObZ8YmPEcuQ%2F</link>
            <description>The so-called Citizens United case offers the Supreme Court a chance to severely curtail the free speech abuses of the Federal Election Commission. John Samples, Director of the Cato Institute&amp;#8217;s Center for Representative Government, Institute for Justice Senior Attorney Steve Simpson and George Mason University law professor Allison Hayward weigh in. You can subscribe to Cato&amp;#8217;s YouTube videos here and our Weekly Video podcast here. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2389673</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 16:27:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2389673</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blue Ribbon Blog Rally for Free Speech Online; een Blauw Lint voor Vrijheid van Meningsuiting</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2375786&amp;cid=t_100562_86_f&amp;fid=38272&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Flaikaspoetnik.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F04%2F26%2Fblue-ribbon-blog-rally-for-free-speech-online-een-blauw-lint-voor-vrijheid-van-meningsuiting%2F</link>
            <description>I have never been a person who would stoop to self-censoring and I never will be. I&amp;#8217;d rather not write at all if I have to stop being frank and honest in my words. -Omid-Reza Mir-Sayafi
Thanks to T at Notes of an Anesthesioboist for getting this going, a group of bloggers is holding a blog [...] (Source: Laika's MedLibLog)</description>
            <author>Laika's MedLibLog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2375786</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:49:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2375786</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blog Rally for Free Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2376107&amp;cid=t_100562_106_f&amp;fid=36682&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FSutureForALiving%2F%7E3%2F5_sM_sG8jWE%2Fblog-rally-for-free-speech.html</link>
            <description>Thanks to T at Notes of an Anesthesioboist&amp;#160; and Paul Levy, Running a Hospital, for getting this going. A group of bloggers is holding a blog rally in support of Roxana Saberi, who is spending her birthday on a hunger strike in Tehran's Evin Prison, where she has been incarcerated for espionage. According to NPR, &amp;quot;The Iranian Political Prisoners Association lists hundreds of people whose names you would be even less likely to recognize: students, bloggers, dissidents, and others who, in a society that lacks a free press, dare to practice free expression.&amp;quot; Hearing reports like these has prompted us to do a ribbon campaign. Blue for blogging. Please consider placing a blue ribbon on your blog or website this week in honor of the journalists, bloggers, students, and writers who ...</description>
            <author>Suture for a Living</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2376107</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 14:45:28 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2376107</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The &quot;Investment Bankers&quot; Strike Back: A Dissident is Thrown Off the Dartmouth Board</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2364987&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F04%2Finvestment-bankers-strike-back.html</link>
            <description>We have posted frequently on the governance and leadership of academic medical organizations. While one would think that health care organizations, and especially academic health care organizations ought to be held to a particularly high standard of governance, we have noted how their governance is often unrepresentative of key constituencies, opaque, unaccountable, unsupportive of the academic and health care mission, and not subject to codes of ethics. How the governance of organizations with such exemplary missions and sterling reputations got this way has been unclear.We have often come back to the example of Dartmouth College, of which Dartmouth Medical School is a significant component. We most recently summarized here an ongoing dispute about the extent that the institution's board ...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2364987</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 21:34:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2364987</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why We Fight</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2306721&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FobSZgazE0kA%2F</link>
            <description>Neal McCluskey&amp;#8217;s classic Cato Policy Analysis, &amp;#8220;Why We Fight: How Public Schools Cause Social Conflict,&amp;#8221; is vindicated once again by the tiff over whether a porn film will be screened on the University of Maryland campus.
At this writing, students intend to go ahead with a showing of &amp;#8220;Pirates II: Stagnetti’s Revenge&amp;#8221; despite threats from a state senator to withhold funding for the university if the film is screened.
Many people object to porn for legitimate reasons. The question is whether the state should weigh in on the subject, pitting the moral views of some against the speech rights of others.
Says McCluskey:
Throughout American history, public schooling has produced political disputes, animosity, and sometimes even bloodshed between diverse people. Suc...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2306721</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:40:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2306721</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Political Incorrectness of Discussing Conflicts of Interest in Medical Academia</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2306981&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F03%2Fpolitical-incorrectness-of-discussing.html</link>
            <description>From today's Boston Globe,Tufts University has withdrawn an invitation for a top aide to US Senator Charles E. Grassley to give the keynote speech at a conference on conflicts of interest in medicine and research, leading one conference organizer to pull out and question the university's commitment to academic freedom.The University-wide Committee on Ethics rescinded the invitation on March 13, according to e-mails obtained by the Globe. The messages said top Tufts officials refused to allow other administrators to be panelists at the meeting if Grassley's aide spoke, saying it was inappropriate to do so while Grassley is investigating ties between a Tufts professor and the drug industry.The senator, a Republican from Iowa, sent a letter on Feb. 17 to the president of Tufts, Lawrence S. Ba...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2306981</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:15:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2306981</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An Inaugural Moment to Improve Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2121592&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F01%2Finaugural-moment-to-improve-health-care.html</link>
            <description>Many phrases of US President Barack Obama's inaugural address seemed to speak to issues often discussed on Health Care Renewal. See the quotes below, taken in order from the transcript of the speech, and I hope not too much out of context.Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things.But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2121592</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:35:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2121592</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Drug Company Claims &quot;Disparagement&quot; by Proxy</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2026911&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F12%2Fdrug-company-claims-disparagement-by.html</link>
            <description>We have occasionally posted on what has come to be called the &quot;Nancy Olivieri case,&quot; one of the most important cases of attempted suppression of clinical research from the 1990s. Briefly, Apotex, a pharmaceutical company, acted against Dr. Nancy Olivieri after she revealed preliminary data from a trial of deferiprone, a chelating agent for the treatment of iron overload in thalassemia, suggesting that the drug was often ineffective in treating iron overload, and appeared to be associated with hepatic fibrosis. Ultimately, a report by the Canadian Association of University Teachers also held that her academic freedom was abridged, in the context of a negotiation between the University of Toronto and Apotex over a large donation, and that the hospital harassed Dr. Olivieri during her dispute...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2026911</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 22:07:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2026911</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Was GSK Merely Incompetent About Medical Informatics, Or Is There a Management Directive To Avoid Specialists Who Might Find &quot;Unacceptable&quot; Problems?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1975000&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F11%2Fwas-gsk-merely-incompetent-about.html</link>
            <description>At my post &quot;GSK, Avandia and Medical Informatics: More on Why Pharma Fails&quot; I outlined repeated rejection of Medical Informatics expertise by GSK, based on what I believed essentially to be the narrowminded and tunnel-visioned thinking of information technologists and others in pharma. I wrote:It is my belief that a view [at GSK] of medical informatics professionals as &quot;writers of algorithms to solve business problems&quot; reflects a fundamentally narrow and mechanistic view of the field, or perhaps a mislabeling of the position as being one of Medical Informatics. The lack of a requirement for formal Medical Informatics education and training suggests the latter.The U.S. Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences seems to agree with that assessment, as I pointed out in an...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1975000</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:24:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1975000</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Silverglate on How Corporate Academic Leaders Try to Control the Message</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1968748&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F11%2Fsilverglate-on-how-corporate-academic.html</link>
            <description>This article suggests several important points.First, there is a growing realization that academia's mission is being increasingly subverted as the leadership of academic organizations, including, in particular, academic medicine, increasingly resembles corporate leadership. (We, of course, have repeatedly discussed the prominent movement in health policy in the 1980s that advocated breaking the &quot;medical guild&quot; while handing power over health care to bureaucrats and managers.)Second, there is a growing realization that academic leaders who ape their corporate peers have a penchant for propaganda promoting their interests, and for suppressing discussion of their faults. Clearly these are causes of the anechoic effect. Never mind that controlling speech and communication in this manner is an...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1968748</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:22:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1968748</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congressman Warns DTC Tax Break May Get Axed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1851211&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F409395623%2F</link>
            <description>Rahm Emanuel, an Illinois Democrat, warned advertising industry leaders that the business-tax deduction for DTC spending could be taken away in 2009 tax legislation, according to DTC Perspectives. 
In a recent meeting with the government affairs committee of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, the newsletter writes Emanuel presented two options for pharma in new tax legislation: retain the tax credit for R&amp;#038;D spending, or keep the business expense deduction for DTC ads - but not both.
“He said this without any tinge of satire, so you have to accept him at his word,” one ad industry advocate familiar with the meeting tells DTC Perspectives, which claims an average drugmaker spends roughly 10 times more on R&amp;#038;D each year than on consumer promotion (although we recal...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1851211</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:26:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1851211</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>&quot;Docs Ditched After Undesirable Diagnosis&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1759834&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F09%2Fdocs-ditched-after-undesirable.html</link>
            <description>From the Johannesburg, South Africa Star, this story, entitled &quot;Docs Ditched after Undesirable Diagnosis,&quot; has some eerie echoes of the past:When medical specialists diagnosed at least 10 cases of manganese-specific illnesses at a factory in Cato Ridge, KwaZulu Natal, the Assmang manganese company dumped them 'like hot potatoes'.They replaced them with a new team of doctors that revised the diagnoses to suggest the sick workers might be alcoholics, drug abusers or victims of Aids.All 10 workers had also been certified previously by the Compensation Commissioner as being permanently disabled as a result of manganism, an occupational disease caused by exposure to excessive levels of toxic manganese.Another 27 workers, also earmarked by doctors as possibly suffering from manganism, were also ...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1759834</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:27:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1759834</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Merger Mania Redux: the Case of the Carilion Health Care System</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1739036&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F08%2Fmerger-mania-redux-case-of-carilion.html</link>
            <description>The Wall Street Journal published an article on how one not-for-profit hospital system came to dominate its market, and the effects of that domination on local health care.How the System Became DominantThe WSJ article documented how a hospital merger created a vertically-integrated health care system. Note that in the old days of &quot;merger mania,&quot; there was a lot of buzz in the health care research and policy circles about how creating such integrated systems to benefit quality and access, and lower costs. This rationale appears below.In 1989, the U.S. Department of Justice tried but failed to prevent a merger between nonprofit Carilion Health System and this former railroad town's other hospital. The merger, it warned in an unsuccessful antitrust lawsuit, would create a monopoly over medica...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1739036</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:30:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1739036</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Shut Up, They Explained (to Ezetimibe Critics)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1674818&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F08%2Fshut-up-they-explained-to-ezetimibe.html</link>
            <description>One of our scouts alerted me to a remarkable editorial just published by Harrison, Brown and Raggi on the ezetimibe controversy [Harrison DG, Brown WV, Raggi P. Enhanced hype. Am J Cardiol 2008; 102: 368-369. Link here, requires subscription.]We have posted before (as have many others,) about problems with the ENHANCE trial of ezetimibe (Zetia, by Schering-Plough, and one component of Vytorin, by Merck), and how the trial seemed to be designed and implemented so as to increase the likelihood of a favorable result for the sponsors' interests. Particularly controversial was the sponsors' decision to change the definition of the trial's outcome variable after the data was collected, (later reversed after it was publicized.) It also turned out that the supposedly &quot;independent&quot; panel responsibl...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1674818</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:33:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1674818</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>More Watchdogs Who Did Not Bark: the UCU Ignores Dr Blumsohn</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1581892&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F07%2Fmore-watchdogs-who-did-not-bark-ucu.html</link>
            <description>We posted first here in 2005, then here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here about the story of Dr Aubrey Blumsohn's dispute with Procter and Gamble (P&amp;G) and the University of Sheffield in the UK. In summary, Blumsohn and Professor Richard Eastell had done clinical research on the risedronate (Actonel), sponsored by P&amp;G, the drug's manufacturer. P&amp;G refused Blumsohn access to the original data from the study he was ostensibly running, and hired a ghost-writer to write abstracts in his name. Some of the analyses done by P&amp;G seemed biased in favor of the drug. Despite repeated attempts, P&amp;G would not give Blumsohn access to the raw data of the project. Blumsohn protested to Eastell, who advised him not to make waves because P&amp;G &quot;is a good source of income&quot; fo...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1581892</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:23:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1581892</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Linking the Anechoic Effect and Suppression of Research to Conflicts of Interest and Mission-Hostile Management: the VCU Case</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1492012&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F06%2Flinking-anechoic-effect-and-suppression.html</link>
            <description>We recently discussed ties between Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) and the tobacco industry. Here we discussed how the university got a grant which gave proprietary control of any research results to the sponsor, Philip Morris, a tobacco company, not the academic researcher, and required the grant itself to be secret. Here we discussed issues raised by the university president's position on the board of directors of another tobacco company, Universal Corporation.A recent article in (Richmond, VA) Style Weekly alleged that VCU faculty fear publicly criticizing the university's relationships with tobacco companies:Virginia Commonwealth University researchers and faculty who fear reprisal for speaking out against a secret smoke-filled-room research agreement between the school and Phil...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1492012</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:53:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1492012</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Hospital CEO Censors the Internet, Only to See &quot;the Handwriting on the Medical Chart&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1436813&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F05%2Fhospital-ceo-censors-internet-only-to.html</link>
            <description>The Fort Worth (Texas) Star-Telegram just ran a six-part series about the misfortunes of the JPS Health Network, a large county hospital network and health care system. The story had several twists. (See this page for links to the latter part of the series and related articles. The first three parts are here, here and here. )The series emphasized the overcrowding and long waits, problems with equipment and the physical plant, and jaded, demoralized staff that unfortunately fit stereotypes of underfunded public hospitals. Here are some quotes from the introduction to the first part of the series:The waiting room reeked. Along a crowded hallway, patients lay in beds, with only a thin curtain for privacy. Nurses readying for a new case in surgery noticed blood, bone and globules of fat on the...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1436813</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 21:32:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1436813</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Vaccines, Autism, A Blogger &amp; Free Speech</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1393903&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F276146279%2F</link>
            <description>The heated controversy over links between autism and vaccines took a strange twist this past month when a high-profile plaintiffs&amp;#8217; attorney subpoeaned a blogger, who regularly questioned the connection between the malady and the products. Why did Cliff Shoemaker take that step? Speculation centers on a post by Kathleen Seidel on her neurodiversity blog showing the fees earned by plaintiffs&amp;#8217; lawyers - particularly Shoemaker - from the vaccine litigation.
Apparently, there was never any indication Seidel had any direct or indirect involvement in a case, which is being handled by Shoemaker, that alleges mercury used in the vaccine caused a plaintiff&amp;#8217;s autism. Nonetheless, as the Legal Blog Watch notes, Shoemaker&amp;#8217;s subpoena sought a sweeping amount of info and documents...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1393903</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:03:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1393903</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A SLAPP Against Clinical Research?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1279421&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F03%2Fslapp-against-clinical-research.html</link>
            <description>Posts on the Wall Street Journal Health Blog, the Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry Blog, and by Dr Aubrey Blumsohn on the Scientific Misconduct Blog all picked up on a brief story in the Harvard Crimson about a lawsuit apparently claiming that a clinical research article, and a randomized controlled trial no less, was defamatory. Here is the gist from that news article,Harvard Medical School professor Douglas P. Kiel is facing a lawsuit because of an article he published in the July 2007 issue of the Journal of American Medicine (JAMA).In the study, Kiel, a gerontologist, said that hip protectors are not effective in preventing injuries among elderly patients, a claim challenged by HipSaver, a popular hip protector manufacturer, in a suit filed in Norfolk Superior Court on Feb. 15.HipSav...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1279421</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 22:11:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1279421</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blogging: Speakers' Corner of the Internet</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1109825&amp;cid=t_100562_132_f&amp;fid=35001&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nodalpoint.org%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Fblogging_speakers_corner_of_the_internet</link>
            <description>There is a famous place in London town, inside Hyde Park, known as Speakers' Corner. It is a space where free speech and self-expression prevail. At Speakers' Corner, anyone can say anything they like about anything they want to anyone who cares to listen. There are some obvious parallels between blogging and Speakers' Corner as well as one rather striking difference.
read more (Source: nodalpoint.org - A bioinformatics weblog)</description>
            <author>nodalpoint.org - A bioinformatics weblog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1109825</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:06:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1109825</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Questions About the Board of the New Reagan-Udall Foundation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1032912&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F11%2Fquestions-about-board-of-new-reagan.html</link>
            <description>On PharmaLot, Ed Silverman noted questions raised about the leadership of the new Reagan-Udall Foundation, which is supposed to help the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) streamline drug and device development. The foundation's financing through the pharmaceutical industry had already raised one obvious set of questions. New questions were raised by the just announced membership of the Foundation's board. Silverman focused on the presence of Dr Tadataka Yamada, billed as President, Global Health Program, Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation. Dr Yamada, however, was previously a GlaxoSmithKline executive, and had been accused of trying to intimidate one of the early critics of Avandia (rosiglitazone). (See our post here.) I should also point out that another member of the board is Dr Wil...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1032912</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:30:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1032912</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Zyprexa Document Leaker To Speak Publicly</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=952290&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F170169428%2F</link>
            <description>Jim Gottstein, an attorney who was one of three people named as conspirators by a federal judge in the infamous Zyprexa document scandal earlier this year, will make a rare public appearance next Monday at Hampshire College, a private liberal arts school in western Massachusetts. Whether Jim will talk about this now-infamous episode isn&amp;#8217;t clear; he&amp;#8217;s still negotiating with Eli Lilly, which markets the antipsychotic, in a bid to avoid court sanctions. The sponsor says he will. In any event, here&amp;#8217;s the flyer.
For those who don&amp;#8217;t recall, Gottstein - who runs The Law Center for Psychiatric Rights, a non-profit against forced drugging; David Egilman, who was an expert witness for plaintiffs&amp;#8217; lawyers suing Lilly, and Alex Berenson, a reporter for The New York Times,...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=952290</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:38:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">952290</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Lilly Settles With Zyprexa Document Leaker</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=850660&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F153531481%2F</link>
            <description>You read it here first. David Egilman, the expert witness who last winter caused a huge controversy by providing The New York Times with sealed documents indicating Lilly downplayed or hid harmful Zyprexa side effects and improperly promoted the antipsychotic to doctors, has struck a deal with the drugmaker.
An order filed this morning in US District Court in Brooklyn, NY, shows that Egilman, a 54-year-old associate professor at Brown University, acknowledged violating a protective order that required court documents to remain sealed. And he&amp;#8217;s agreed to pay $100,000, which Lilly will donate to the International Center for Clubhouse Development. By agreeing to the deal, Egilman avoided facing civil and criminal contempt penalties.
&amp;#8220;Dr. Egilman has now confirmed in writing what L...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=850660</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2007 17:30:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">850660</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is It Free Speech Or Off-Label Marketing?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=840781&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F152237896%2F</link>
            <description>That appears to be at issue in a group of eight putative class-action suits consolidated before a federal judge in Newark, N.J. What&amp;#8217;s more, the litigation will be among the first cases to test whether drugmakers may face civil liability for promoting off-label uses, according to The New Jersey Law Journal.
The suits were filed against Schering-Plough following a $435 million settlement last year of civil and criminal charges brought by the federal government, which claimed the drugmaker paid kickbacks to docs and promoted drugs for unapproved uses. The plaintiffs are private drug users and third-party payers, such as unions and health insurance companies. 
The civil suits charge Schering-Plough promoted off-label uses of hepatitis and cancer drugs, in some cases for longer periods o...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=840781</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:59:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">840781</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Bit of Representativeness, Accountability and Transparency in Academic Governance Threatened</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=838037&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F09%2Fbit-of-representativeness.html</link>
            <description>In the opinion section of the Wall Street Journal (and available free here from OpinionJournal) was an interesting article about the governance of US higher education, with some lessons for academic health care.The story is about Dartmouth College, an Ivy League school, and home of a small, but distinguished medical school. Dartmouth has an unusual way of picking the members of its board of trustees.It is one of a few schools in the U.S. that allow alumni to elect leaders directly. Eight of the 18 members of Dartmouth's governing Board of Trustees are chosen by the popular vote of some 66,500 graduates. (The other seats are reserved mostly for major donors, along with ex officio positions for the governor of New Hampshire and the college president.) This arrangement has been in place since...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=838037</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 Sep 2007 19:48:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">838037</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why is the NIH Monitoring Its Employees' Communication with Congress?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=814141&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F08%2Fwhy-is-nih-monitoring-its-employees.html</link>
            <description>We have posted quite a bit (recently here) about conflicts of interest affecting top US National Institutes of Health (NIH) officials. In 2005, the NIH director reinstated strict rules about conflicts of interest. Last month, we noted that allegations of conflict of interest at the Institutes continue, most recently involving the head of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), Dr David Schwartz.The Associated Press (here via the San Diego Union-Tribune) just reported the case's latest ramifications.First, Dr Schwartz has temporarily stepped down from his position, pending an investigation:The NIH is beginning its own review of the management and leadership of the institute, NIH director Dr. Elias Zerhouni announced Monday. The embattled director of the institute, D...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=814141</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:38:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">814141</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Chilling Effect: Feeling Genzyme Pressure, Bioenvision Shareholder Ends Web Site</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=751831&amp;cid=t_100562_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F136563965%2F</link>
            <description>This morning, we wrote that Genzyme, which two months ago launched a controversial $350 million bid for Bioenvision, last week filed court papers indicating it wants to subpoena documents belonging to a Bioenvision shareholder. This shareholder, Adam Shay, created an outspoken web site urging other shareholders to reject the deal. Genzyme also wants to depose Shay, who manages a tax service in Wilmington, NC.
A Genzyme spokeswoman, Maria Cantor, insisted that issuing a third-party subpoena is a “routine” part of litigation and wouldn’t discuss “strategy or tactics.” When pressed, however, about Shay’s free-speech rights, she denies Genzyme is trying to shut down Shay’s web site. “It’s part of the issue, but it doesn’t involve stopping the blog. We’re not targeting the...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=751831</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 17:30:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">751831</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cockfighting Tests First Amendment</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=730399&amp;cid=t_100562_107_f&amp;fid=35762&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Fscienceblogs%2Fgrrlscientist%2F%7E3%2F133118793%2Fcockfighting_tests_first_amend.php</link>
            <description>tags: cockfighting, animal cruelty, First Amendment, free speech

When I learned recently that my neighbors regularly engage in cockfighting and dog fighting (illegally, of course) I was thoroughly disgusted with them. But I learned just today that cockfighting is also streamed over the internet, which shouldn't be surprising to anyone who is familiar with the 'net, but nonetheless, I think it is absolutely disgusting and distressing, since it serves to underline the basic lack of compassion and empathy that some people have for animals in general, and for birds specifically. 
 Read the rest of this post... | Read the comments on this post... (Source: Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted))</description>
            <author>Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted)</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=730399</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2007 21:35:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">730399</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Censored Surgeons General</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=727250&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F07%2Fcensored-surgeons-general.html</link>
            <description>Several major newspapers (including the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and Washington Post) just reported on testimony of three former US Surgeons General about politically based attempts to censor them. Most of the emphasis was on the testimony of Dr Richard H Carmona, former Surgeon General under President George W Bush. To quote the Washington Post's story,Former surgeon general Richard H. Carmona yesterday accused the Bush administration of muzzling him on sensitive public health issues....Political appointees in the administration routinely scrubbed his speeches for politically sensitive content and blocked him from speaking out on public health matters....'Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is often ignored, margi...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=727250</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:27:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">727250</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Limbaugh Jumps the Shark</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=571247&amp;cid=t_100562_133_f&amp;fid=35452&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.graphictruth.com%2F2007%2F04%2Fwhy-hasn-limbaugh-been-fired-yet.html</link>
            <description>Alternet wonders why Limbaugh hasn't been fired yet - apparently not understanding what &quot;syndicated&quot; means. But I do wonder how long it will take for people to realize he's about as funny and relevant as &quot;Who's the Boss&quot; re-runs.This is a head-shaker. Imus gets canned for calling some college women basketball players &quot;nappy-headed hos&quot; and yet Rush Limbaugh plays &quot;Barack The Magic Negro&quot; on his show and he is still on the air?And the story links to a video that is one long &quot;coon joke&quot; which makes me wonder another thing entirely: How stupid do you have to be to consider this either funny or informative? If the best ammunition you can come up with against the policies of flaming liberals like Barak Obama and Al Sharpton is that they are (gasp) black, you ain't much use. Because, well, I got...</description>
            <author>Graphictruth</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=571247</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">571247</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>FDA Leader Warns Dissent is Not &quot;Helpful&quot;</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=496937&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F03%2Ffda-leader-warns-dissent-is-not-helpful.html</link>
            <description>And speaking of leaders of health care organizations who will not tolerate dissent...The Associated Press (here via SFGate.com) reported that although Dr Andrew von Eschenbach, the new chief of the US Food and Drug Adminstration (FDA) vowed during a congressional hearing to protect &quot;the legal rights of every single employee within the FDA,&quot; he seemed to have a rather harsh view of any FDA employee who might speak out publicly in opposition to the party line.However, during a June 2006 meeting, von Eschenbach told a group of 30 to 40 employees that anyone who went against the &quot;team&quot; could end up being &quot;traded,&quot; according to accounts by agency whistle-blowers, including Dr. David Ross.During Thursday's hearing, von Eschenbach apologized to Ross, who now works for the Department of Veterans A...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=496937</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:14:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">496937</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Johns Hopkins Administration Attempts to Outlaw Rudeness</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=469295&amp;cid=t_100562_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F03%2Fjohns-hopkins-administration-attempts.html</link>
            <description>We have posted before about institutional threats to free expression at Johns Hopkins University, home to one of the most renowned medical schools and teaching hospitals in the US. The story continues, as per the Johns Hopkins Newsletter,Members of the Student Council (StuCo) expressed frustration with some of the University's newest policies concerning equality and respect in the workplace -- including those endorsed by President William Brody himself -- in a meeting with members of the administration Tuesday night.The council met with administrators to discuss alleged ambiguities of the Principles for Ensuring Equity, Civility and Respect policy endorsed by Brody and the Johns Hopkins Committee on the Status of Women.In a letter sent in Dec. to Susan Boswell, dean of Student Life, the St...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=469295</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 20:06:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">469295</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

