Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share CASE BRIEF - Donaldson v. O'Connor - Part 2
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
CASE BRIEF - Donaldson v. O'Connor - Part 2
In the conclusion of our Donaldson v. O’Connor Case Brief, we break down the Supreme Court’s narrow but powerful ruling: the government cannot lock away a non-dangerous person simply because they are mentally ill, different, or inconvenient. We explore the Fifth Circuit’s controversial “quid pro quo” theory and the rejection of the “quid pro quo” theory, and the Court’s ultimate focus on liberty and due process over treatment.
Join us as we dive in and examine the Supreme Court’s language about freedom, stigma, and public intolerance, due process, and what the decision in Donaldson v. O’Connor did and did not change with respect to the civil commitment of non-dangerous, non-violent mentally ill individuals, and whether it is fair to hold the doctors personally liable for the understaffing and failure of the government to provide for individuals in state-run mental institutions.
This episode is about protections of the constitution, institutional power, and the uncomfortable truth that without due process protections, anyone could lose their freedom.
The information provided in this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. The content should not be construed as legal advice or any lawyer client relationship.The information is not a substitute for professional legal counsel. THESE ARE JUST OUR OPINIONS!!!
Reach out or follow us:
Instagram: @gavel_and_gossip
TikTok: @gavel.gossip
Leslie's Instagram: @lesliecaesq
Kristan's Instagram: @krush18
Links, episode information, documents and pictures credits can be found at: https://sites.google.com/view/gavelandgossip/home
View all episodes
By Leslie and KristanIn the conclusion of our Donaldson v. O’Connor Case Brief, we break down the Supreme Court’s narrow but powerful ruling: the government cannot lock away a non-dangerous person simply because they are mentally ill, different, or inconvenient. We explore the Fifth Circuit’s controversial “quid pro quo” theory and the rejection of the “quid pro quo” theory, and the Court’s ultimate focus on liberty and due process over treatment.
Join us as we dive in and examine the Supreme Court’s language about freedom, stigma, and public intolerance, due process, and what the decision in Donaldson v. O’Connor did and did not change with respect to the civil commitment of non-dangerous, non-violent mentally ill individuals, and whether it is fair to hold the doctors personally liable for the understaffing and failure of the government to provide for individuals in state-run mental institutions.
This episode is about protections of the constitution, institutional power, and the uncomfortable truth that without due process protections, anyone could lose their freedom.
The information provided in this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. The content should not be construed as legal advice or any lawyer client relationship.The information is not a substitute for professional legal counsel. THESE ARE JUST OUR OPINIONS!!!
Reach out or follow us:
Instagram: @gavel_and_gossip
TikTok: @gavel.gossip
Leslie's Instagram: @lesliecaesq
Kristan's Instagram: @krush18
Links, episode information, documents and pictures credits can be found at: https://sites.google.com/view/gavelandgossip/home