Discussion board primary response
1. Double Jeopardy
After you read Bae v. Shalala and US v. Halper, describe how the decision in Shalala is consistent with Halper. Understanding the congressional desire to “cleanse” the industry, the US Constitutional prohibition against Double Jeopardy is not subject to the whim of Congress. Is being barred from ever working in an industry not a punishment? Explain.
Bea case:
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/44/489/512822/
Halper case, see attachment
2. US v. Dotterweich
In US v. Dotterweich, the Court held that not only may a corporation be held liable under the FDCA, but that corporate employees may be as well. The Court states that “Congress has preferred to place it upon those who have at least the opportunity of informing themselves of the existence of conditions imposed for the protection of consumers before sharing in illicit commerce…” With that statement, wouldn’t it be prudent for every officer, director, manager, or supervisor in a corporation be aware of every shipment leaving a company to limit their liability? Is this really feasible? If you were in such a position, what would you do?
The post Discussion board primary response appeared first on trainedwriters.
