Public opinion in recent years has been seemingly manipulated by superfluous stories, bad press, and negative commentaries regarding the perceived "Medical Malpractice Crisis." It has initiated a political attack on Florida's tort system which has resulted in making valid medical malpractice claims even more so difficult for victimized plaintiffs to pursue. After months of diligent research, and with the loyal aid of my university advisors and the dedicated law librarians I've had the honor to work with, I have thoroughly analyzed Florida's past and present medical malpractice tort reforms and governing procedural laws; in addition to arguing, by virtue of this thesis, why these reforms were truly enacted, how traditional tort reforms have egregiously compromised public interests, why Florida's future--with regard to legislative change--is grim, and how new, innovative tort reforms--such as those established overseas--could genuinely benefit Floridians. The premise of the conclusion reached in this research is partially iterated in a quote by the critically acclaimed "Insurance Law Expert," Tom Baker: "...the medical malpractice myth. Built on a foundation of urban legend mixed with the occasional true story, supported by selective references to academic studies, and repeated so often that even the mythmakers forget the exaggeration, half truth, and outright misinformation employed in the service of their greater good, the medical malpractice myth has filled doctors, patients, legislators, and voters with the kind of fear that short circuits critical thinking." --Baker, T. (2005). The medical malpractice myth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

The United States Supreme Court has not yet examined several aspects of the death penalty. One aspect is the ability for the state to forcefully medicate an incompetent inmate, which may result in the inmate appearing competent for execution. While the Supreme Court' ruled that it is unconstitutional to execute an inmate who is incompetent, inmates who would have had their executions vacated due to mental illness are executed because the state can put them on an involuntary medication regimen. According to many experts, involuntary medication regimens mask the affects of their illness instead of providing a cure. Experts often refer to this practice as the "chemical straitjacket." Because the effects of antipsychotic medication, inmates may be sedated to a point where they appear competent, but in reality, they are sedated to a point where their mental illness is still present yet undetectable. As a result, placing condemned inmates on involuntary medication regimens has the possibility to violate the inmate's Fifth, Sixth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The intent of this thesis is to examine whether the Supreme Court has successfully upheld its duty to promote a fair judicial system by allowing the medicate to execute scheme to continue. Through the analysis of case law, law review articles, and the American Constitution, this thesis will evaluate the treatment of condemned inmates who show signs of incompetence. Through analysis, this thesis aims to raise awareness to an issue that, in the opinion of this writer, deserves the attention of American courts and other governing bodies.

America's Sex Offense statutes and cases are some of the most controversial sections of modern law, both for the extreme sensitivity of their subject matter as well as the scope and application of those laws. This thesis is an analysis and overview of both the objective and subjective issues posed by the current state of those very laws: the subjective portion explored the development of current laws and the diverse attendant legal issues such as over-broadness and excessive or misdirected effect as compared to the Legislative and public intent which directly led to the development of these laws. Additionally a more objective study of their efficacy was conducted through the use of data regarding offense rates by locality. This objective data was procured from both the United States Census and Bureau of Justice statistics, which contained national averages such as the overall violent crime rate, and from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Statistics and was supplemented with additional data from other academic sources. It is both the subjective conclusion and the interpretation of objective data that while the rate of sex offenses has lowered in recent decades this effect is a part of the overall trend of reduction in all violent offenses, and that the extreme stance of modern sex offense laws have arguably resulted in the net-negative of creating a class of individuals ostracized from all but other sex offenders who are virtually incapable of supporting themselves or at times of even finding legal habitation post-release. With little to no chance of a productive life, there is the strong possibility of recidivism and little incentive to avoid re-offending.

This thesis examines two issues facing Florida's young and fledgling Veteran Treatment Courts. First is whether or not a separate hybrid court of already existing mental health and drug courts is needed exclusively for veterans; and second, funding and efficiency of such courts as compared to traditional criminal institutions.

After the calamitous and environmentally devastating occurrence of the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, the sobering realities of the United States' failure to successfully protect its ocean waters have caused several modifications in policy, legislation, and overall direction ofthe entire nation. Although there has been a general shift towards ecological safety and away from the pursuit to drill, oil-drilling explorations have continued to take place in internationally. This research will focus on the future operations of Repsol YPF, S.A., a Spanish oil company stationed in Cuba, whose drilling ambitions have caused a myriad of problems for the United States. The intent of this paper is to investigate the legalities surrounding Cuba's forthcoming deepwater oil drilling plan within the Florida Straights and how the existing relations between Cuba and the United States will shape the outcome. The majority of United States officials, senators, and policymakers are experiencing a great deal of anxiety and apprehension as Cuba's oil drilling plan continues to solidify. Recent changes in legislation and congressional opinion display the United States' overall objective to shape the manner in which the drilling operations will be carried out. This thesis will ultimately explore what progress the United States has made thus far in the sector of dialogue with Cuban officials, the various options the United States could seek in regards to taking part in the drilling operations that will soon commence in Cuba, and the current risks involved with the entirety of the drilling endeavor.

The main objective in this research was to examine the extent to which gender and gender biases influence monetary benefits received, including jury award amounts, in workplace sexual harassment claims. Two methods were utilized to explore the discrepancies in monetary benefits received based on gender differences. The first method used was a survey to test various gender attitudes, attitudes on sexual harassment, and how influential a victim's gender was on determinations of damage award amounts in sexual harassment cases. 6 two-way factorial univariate between-subject analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were used to analyze the survey data. The second method in this project consisted of an examination of claims filed by victims of sexual harassment. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission statistics were broken down by gender with respect to resolution type. This provided a means to assess the actual monetary benefits received by both men and women across all possible forms of claim resolutions. In conjunction, these two methods provide a more balanced approach to the assessment of gender discrepancies in sexual harassment claims. Using a combination of actual claims of sexual harassment and survey data, rather than just one or the other, allows for direct comparison between perception and reality. The comparison of perception and reality allows for a more complete assessment of the state of sexual harassment claims as they relate to victim's gender. With a more complete assessment of sexual harassment claims and perceptions of sexual harassment it may be possible to bring to light potential injustices caused by gender or gender stereotyping, and correct any imbalances that may be present.

The United States has a drug issue that is perpetually problematic. Efforts are being made on every level of government to reduce drug use and deter current and potential future users. Some of these efforts however are putting citizen's rights at risk in a manner that threatens the United States Constitution that hails over both the state and federal governments. My thesis will examine Florida's avant-garde approach to simplifying drug convictions through unprecedented legislation that has already been ruled unconstitutional on its face by the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The decade long struggle will soon culminate in the Florida Supreme Court, and if found unconstitutional, could potentially impact thousands of inmates among other legal consequences. Through literature review and case study I will discuss the history of this issue and conclude by discussing possible rulings of the Florida Supreme Court in State v. Adkins, SC11-1878 (2D11-4559, 2nd DCA). In addition, I will analyze the case timeline that led to the legislative action which is being called into question in Adkins. I hypothesize that the ruling in Adkins will declare Florida's drug statute unconstitutional; however, I further presume that the currently incarcerated defendants will continue to serve their sentences virtually unaffected by the ruling, with some extraordinary exceptions. First, I will discuss the underlying legal premises, succeeded by an analysis of all pertinent case law and literature to assess the constitutionality of Florida's drug statute to further support my hypothesis. My goal for this thesis is to give perspective to the layperson as well as contribute to the statewide legal community through my organization of the subject, and analysis of case law.

The Occupy movement has spread over hundreds of cities nationwide and over 1,500 cities around the world. The movement is formed around a common goal, which is to protest the way government actions or inactions have rooted widespread discontent. The Occupy movement has encountered opposition from the cities and counties where it is located. Arrests have been made for a number of violations of city and county codes including resistance to police orders and disorderly conduct charges. In our country, freedom of speech and the right to protest have been regarded as inalienable rights. The question becomes how to balance the rights of the people involved against the rights and obligations of the government. This thesis will provide an in depth look at the issues being discussed in cases and hearings involving the Occupy movement. The key issue plaintiffs argue is that their First Amendment rights are being infringed on. In January 2012, both international human rights and United States civil liberties experts at seven law school clinics across the country met and formed the Protest and Assembly Rights Project. The project investigated the United States response to Occupy Wall Street. This thesis will discuss and recap some of their findings. In addition, it will analyze the Federal Constitutional restrictions to protestor's rights and the cases that arise on the grounds of these restrictions, as well as examine how the courts interpret the First Amendment and clarify these issues along with defining protestor's constitutional rights. Based upon the Constitutional rights and legitimate restrictions, the thesis will make appropriate recommendations on the limits for both the protestors and the local government.

The recent societal development of highly specialized evidence has brought new problems to the forefront of the jury system. Because of the constitutional right to jury trials citizens of the United States and Florida have, it is imperative that the problems facing juries be discussed and explored. The question of whether or not juries can be trusted to comprehend highly technical evidence must be answered for the Florida jury to move forward into modern era. The subsequent question of what biases regarding highly specialized evidence have arisen must also be examined and addressed. Furthermore, solutions designed to increase a jury's comprehension and decrease their bias must be discussed and propagated. The purpose of this thesis is to explore the answers to those questions and provide potential solutions to the issues facing the modern Florida jury. Law journals, statutes, and case law all suggest that juror comprehension decreases substantially when faced with highly complex evidence. Biases are also commonly associated with these forms of evidence and are leading towards unfair verdicts. Despite these problems, there are solutions that are readily available in the areas of alternative dispute resolution. Further solutions may be created through a revision of the jury instruction process. This thesis seeks to raise awareness of the problems facing the Florida jury and contribute solutions that are practical and easily used.

The purpose of this thesis is to examine the Affordable Care Act through an analysis of the United States Supreme Court's holding in The National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. In order to better understand the Supreme Court's reasoning in that case, this paper will first examine the history and the function of the Supreme Court, which will demonstrate the Court's power to either augment or diminish the power of the states in relation to the federal government. This paper will then discuss the background of the Affordable Care Act, the procedural history of the case, and the majority's analysis supporting its decision. The concurring and dissenting opinions of the other justices will be discussed to present the various viewpoints regarding the proper role of the federal government and the implications this case may have on federal/state conflict. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Department of Health and Human Services. The 5-4 decision was extremely close and the opinions given by each Justice highlighted the various flaws and benefits of the Act it was looking to uphold. Further research of Supreme Court cases in our country's history reveal the trend of augmenting and diminishing state's rights. This thesis will examine the constitutionality of the aforementioned decision, the effects it will have on each of the states within the United States, and the impact the citizens will experience.