@article{09ff205acc584ff5b4a599308100d583,
title = "2007-2008 National Health Law Moot Court Competition.",
author = "Paul McGreal",
note = "Funding Information: The United States Supreme Court struck just such a balance in Legal Services Corp v. Velasquez, 531 U.S. 533 (2001). Velazquez addressed a federal restriction on lawyers who received funding from the Legal Services Corporation (LSC). The LSC distributes funds to support legal representation of indigent litigants in non-criminal matters. Federal law prohibited lawyers who accepted LSC funds from advocating the invalidity or unconstitutionality of a state or federal welfare law. This restriction meant that a lawyer would have to either forgo representation of a client whose matter raised such issues, or withdraw from representation if such an issue arose. The federal government defended the restriction as a permissible regulation of the use of federal funds. See Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991). Copyright: This record is sourced from MEDLINE{\textregistered}/PubMed{\textregistered}, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1080/01947640802494796",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "29",
pages = "395--409",
journal = "Journal of Legal Medicine",
issn = "0194-7648",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "4",
}