The First Century of Right to Arms Litigation

This Article examines state court cases involving the right to arms, during the first century following ratification of the Amendment in 1791. This is not the first article to survey some of those cases. This Article includes additional cases, and details the procedural postures and facts, not only the holdings. The Article closely examines how the Supreme Court integrated the nineteenth century arms cases into Heller and McDonald to shape modern Second Amendment law. Part I briefly explains two English cases which greatly influenced American legal understandings. Semayne’s Case is the foundation of “castle doctrine” — the right to home security which includes the right of armed self-defense in the home. Sir John Knight’s Case fortified the tradition of the right to bear arms, providing that the person must bear arms in a non-terrifying manner. Part II examines American antebellum cases; these are the cases to which Heller looked for guidance on the meaning of the Second Amendment. Part III looks at cases from Reconstruction and the early years of Jim Crow, through 1891. As with the antebellum cases, the large majority of post-war cases are from the Southeast, which during the nineteenth century was the region most ardent for gun control. The heart of gun control country was Tennessee and Arkansas; courts there resisted some infringements of the right to arms, but eventually gave up. Heller and McDonald did not look to the Jim Crow cases as constructive precedents on the Second Amendment.

Changes in Access to Health Services of the Immigrant and Native-Born Population in Spain in the Context of Economic Crisis

Aim: To analyze changes in access to health care and its determinants in the immigrant and native-born populations in Spain, before and during the economic crisis. Methods: Comparative analysis of two iterations of the Spanish National Health Survey (2006 and 2012). Outcome variables were: unmet need and use of different healthcare levels; explanatory variables: need, predisposing and enabling factors. Multivariate models were performed (1) to compare outcome variables in each group between years, (2) to compare outcome variables between both groups within each year, and (3) to determine the factors associated with health service use for each group and year. Results: unmet healthcare needs decreased in 2012 compared to 2006; the use of health services remained constant, with some changes worth highlighting, such as the decline in general practitioner visits among autochthons and a narrowed gap in specialist visits between the two populations. The factors associated with health service use in 2006 remained constant in 2012. Conclusion: Access to healthcare did not worsen, possibly due to the fact that, until 2012, the national health system may have cushioned the deterioration of social determinants as a consequence of the financial crisis. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the effects of health policy responses to the crisis after 2012.

Brèves observations sur la consécration constitutionnelle d’un droit de retrait volontaire = Brief comments on the constitutional recognition of the right to withdraw. Research Papers in Law, 5/2004.

No abstract.

Competition law proceedings before the European Commission and the right to a fair trial: no need for reform? Research Papers in Law, 5/2008

From the Introduction. This paper will thus show that, given the rapid "criminalisation" of competition law proceedings, sanctions should in principle be imposed at first instance I. Sanctions imposed by the Commission in competition proceedings are "criminal charges" within the meaning of Article 6 ECHR by an independent and impartial tribunal fulfilling all the conditions of Article 6 ECHR (part I). Or at the very least, these sanctions should be subject to full jurisdictional review by an independent and impartial tribunal in order to comply with Article 6 ECHR and to cure the defects of the administrative procedure (part II). It is doubtful however whether such a full jurisdictional review, as it is understood by the ECtHR, is available at Community-level in antitrust cases.