Laws Mens Rea Statute 
JURIST
FEBRUARY 27, 2025
The report also criticized the proliferation of laws that require no specific mental state as contributing to over-criminalization in the country. ” The report further argued that mandating a mens rea requirement in every federal criminal statute would help eliminate over-criminalization and the abuse of prosecutorial discretion.
FDA Law Blog
AUGUST 4, 2022
Kirschenbaum — In a recent decision, the Second Circuit upheld the HHS Office of the Inspector General (OIG)’s position that Pfizer’s proposed copay assistance program for its high-cost heart treatment would violate the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). The Second Circuit’s Interpretation of the Anti-Kickback Statute. Pfizer, Inc.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 28, 2022
Even in the midst of a historic opioid crisis, and an intensely fractured Supreme Court term, the justices found common ground in longstanding presumptions of criminal law and the core principle of physician discretion. The case, Ruan v. The question was whether a doctor’s subjective intent in prescribing matters.
SCOTUSBlog
JUNE 24, 2021
pleaded guilty to violating a federal law barring people convicted of a felony from possessing a firearm. The ACCA, in Borden’s view, required a higher culpable state of mind, or mens rea , than recklessness. A mens rea of purpose equates to a consciously desirable outcome.
FDA Law Blog
NOVEMBER 6, 2022
Gaulkin — We previously blogged about Pfizer’s copay assistance lawsuit, which sought to challenge HHS’s interpretation of the Federal health care program anti-kickback statute (AKS) and position that the company’s proposed copay assistance program would violate the AKS. The Second Circuit’s Interpretation of the AKS and its Mens Rea Element.
SCOTUSBlog
MARCH 2, 2022
Justices Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett pressed both sides on where the standard for the exception comes from, noting that the phrases “good faith” and “honest effort” appear nowhere in the statute and that the entirety of the exception, which likewise does not specify an intent standard, is the product of regulation.
Constitutional Law Reporter
JULY 19, 2023
18–3–602(1)(c), a Colorado statute making it unlawful to “[r]epeatedly. Following Colorado law, the trial court rejected that argument under an objective standard, finding that a reasonable person would consider the messages threatening. Counterman’s messages put C.W. in fear and upended her daily existence: C.W.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
132 
Let's personalize your content