Federal Supremacy and State Anti-Subversive Legislation

State legislatures have been prompted by international tensions of recent years to enact new and stringent anti-subversive laws, thus adding to an already large body of statutes directed against various forms of subversion. Many of these statutes are open to serious objection on constitutional ·grounds. The purpose of this article is to examine those objections which are based upon the notion either that federal power in the area is exclusive or that Congress, expressly or by necessary inference, has pre-empted the field

LEGISLATION-STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION-VALIDITY OF CANON THAT STATUTES IN DEROGATION OF THE COMMON LAW SHOULD BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED

Plaintiffs brought suit to recover damages for the death of their adopted son under the Mississippi wrongful death act, which provides that an action may be brought by the parent for the death of the child. The defendants incorporated in their answer a special plea that the statute does not vest a cause of action in adoptive parents. On appeal from a judgment sustaining this plea, without prejudice to the rights of the deceased\u27s natural parents to bring another action, held, affirmed. The Mississippi wrongful death statute gives a right of action to natural parents only. Boroughs v. Oliver, (Miss. 1953) 64 S. (2d) 338

REGULATION OF BUSINESS-FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT-LEGALITY OF OFFERS OF \u27\u27FREE GOODS UPON AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE OTHER MERCHANDISE

On June 30, 1948 the Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint against Walter J. Black, Inc., a corporation doing business as the Classics Club and the Detective Book Club. The Commission charged that use by the respondent of the word free in its advertising was false, misleading, and deceptive. The alleged deception consisted in the fact that in order to obtain the books designated as free the prospective purchaser was required to join respondent\u27s club and thereby obligated himself to purchase at least four books a year from the respondent. The hearing examiner in his initial decision found that respondent\u27s use of the word free was in fact misleading and deceptive. Respondent appealed to the Commission. Held, Commissioner Mead dissenting, complaint dismissed. Walter J. Black, Inc., F.T.C. Dkt. 5571 (1953)

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - JUDICIAL POWERS - LEGALITY OF THE GRAND JURY REPORT

On December 2, 1952, a federal grand jury for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in a presentment made to that court, took the State Department severely to task for what it considered to be a conspicuous failure in handling the problem of subversive employees, United States citizens, at the United Nations. It further charged the State Department with impeding the grand jury\u27s progress in attempting to fix responsibility for the failure upon certain State Department officials. On October 11, 1951, the Camden County grand jury presented to the Superior Court of New Jersey for Camden County a report in which various irregularities in connection with the management of the county jail were charged. The sheriff of the county moved to expunge from the record portions of this report alleged to be defamatory as to him. An order denying this motion was subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court of New Jersey in In re Presentment by Camden County Grand Jury. The October grand jury of Westchester County, New York, in its report on the so-called Peekskill Riots of 1949, roundly criticized the American Civil Liberties Union for publishing a report entitled Violence in Peekskill. The grand jury described the Union\u27s report as \u27\u27based on a biased assumption as to the underlying cause of the disorder and found that much of its text and some of its conclusions are so far from the truth as to be scandalous. In Tennessee, a grand jury which two years ago investigated charges of immoral practices in a Memphis high school reported to the court that the charges were wholly unfounded. Incorporated in the report was a statement that Mrs. Maurine D. Hayslip, a teacher at the high school who had first publicized the charges, had viciously maligned the school and that her continued employment in city schools would be unadvisable and a disservice to the community. A motion by Mrs. Hayslip to expunge this portion of the report was denied by the Supreme Court of Tennessee in Hayslip v. State. The October grand jury for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in a presentment issued November 25, 1952, said that certain non-Communist affidavits filed by union officials under section 9(h) of the Taft-Hartley Act were not worth the paper they are written on and that the filing of such affidavits was a subterfuge. The union officials, who were not named, had invoked the privilege against self-incrimination when subpoenaed in connection with an investigation of possible violations of conspiracy and perjury laws arising out of the non-Communist affidavit provision of the Taft-Hartley Act. The grand jury recommended that the National Labor Relations Board revoke the certification of the unions involved. Two unions and four union officials individually moved to expunge this presentment from the records of the court. The district court granted the motion in Application of United Electrical Workers

INTERNATIONAL LAW-RESERVATIONS TO COMMERCIAL TREATIES DEALING WITH ALIENS\u27 PLIGHTS TO ENGAGE IN THE PROFESSIONS

The question of how far an alien may engage in a profession despite state requirements of citizenship which attach to many professions has not been widely litigated or discussed in this country. Recent action by the United States Senate, however, has created interest in problems presented by commercial treaty provisions which guarantee to alien nationals of many countries the right to engage in professions. Attention has thus been focused on law and policy questions which were formerly of little concern outside of the State Department. On July 21, 1953 the Senate gave its advice and consent to the ratification of commercial treaties with Israel, Denmark, Greece, Japan, and the Federal Republic of Germany. In each of these treaties appeared a provision guaranteeing reciprocally the rights of nationals to engage in the professions

New genetic loci link adipose and insulin biology to body fat distribution.

Body fat distribution is a heritable trait and a well-established predictor of adverse metabolic outcomes, independent of overall adiposity. To increase our understanding of the genetic basis of body fat distribution and its molecular links to cardiometabolic traits, here we conduct genome-wide association meta-analyses of traits related to waist and hip circumferences in up to 224,459 individuals. We identify 49 loci (33 new) associated with waist-to-hip ratio adjusted for body mass index (BMI), and an additional 19 loci newly associated with related waist and hip circumference measures (P < 5 × 10(-8)). In total, 20 of the 49 waist-to-hip ratio adjusted for BMI loci show significant sexual dimorphism, 19 of which display a stronger effect in women. The identified loci were enriched for genes expressed in adipose tissue and for putative regulatory elements in adipocytes. Pathway analyses implicated adipogenesis, angiogenesis, transcriptional regulation and insulin resistance as processes affecting fat distribution, providing insight into potential pathophysiological mechanisms

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Federal Supremacy and State Anti-Subversive Legislation

State legislatures have been prompted by international tensions of recent years to enact new and stringent anti-subversive laws, thus adding to an already large body of statutes directed against various forms of subversion. Many of these statutes are open to serious objection on constitutional ·grounds. The purpose of this article is to examine those objections which are based upon the notion either that federal power in the area is exclusive or that Congress, expressly or by necessary inference, has pre-empted the field