Institutional Reform Litigation in an Era of Governance

Bibliographic Data

ID12450330
AuthorsChristine M Reed (University of Nebraska at Omaha, corresponding author)
Year2009
Volume31
Issue4
Pages577-584
Publication date2009-12-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAdministrative Theory & Praxis (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1084-1806 • E-ISSN: 1949-0461
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.2753/atp1084-1806310407
OpenAlexW1966057443
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited3

This article examines the effects of governance reforms on the role of the courts in institutional reform litigation. It also explores the impact on governance of judicial deference to executive control of local provider networks. The 1999 Olmstead decision and its aftermath illustrate these mutually reinforcing tendencies. State home and community-based Medicaid waiver programs support de-institutionalization but create no legally enforceable rights to services. Conversely, lower federal court cases since Olmstead have resulted in settlement agreements and only incremental expansion of waiver services. These trends stand in stark contrast to institutional reform litigation in the 1970s. Judicial deference to executive control is consistent with an emerging model of legitimacy based on political accountability to a general public interest. To conclude, an outline is presented of a new jurisprudence of community to replace the current jurisprudence of rights that subordinates the right to belong to one's community to the individual's right to be free from the confines of state programs

Accountability · Business · Corporate governance · Deference · Jurisprudence · Law and economics · Legitimacy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · State (computer science · Waiver · Law · Legal Issues in South Africa · Legal principles and applications · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub