June 22, 2018


Looking for PR & Finance Directors -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Elections 2016-2017 -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Why the ERA Failed: Comfort Over Content in the Fight for Women’s Rights -

Thursday, May 5, 2016

The Extent to Which Parents Should Regulate Their Children’s Abortions -

Thursday, May 5, 2016

Human Rights in a Reclusive Context: North Korea -

Thursday, May 5, 2016

Separation without Justification: Parental Rights of Pregnant Juveniles in Correctional Facilities -

Thursday, May 5, 2016

U.S. Asylum after September 11: Failures of the PATRIOT and ID Acts -

Thursday, May 5, 2016

Genomicare: The Affordable Care Act of 2023 -

Thursday, May 5, 2016

“Social Worker with a Gun:” The Role of Policing in Harm Reduction Among Addicts -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Pulling Principles Out of Thick Air: The Incorporation of Customary International Law Under the Alien Tort Claims Act of 1789 After Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Schuette v. BAMN: Moving Toward a Colorblind Constitution -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

American Women in Combat: What Israel and Canada Can Teach the United States About Integration -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Now Accepting Submissions! -

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Join WULR! -

Monday, April 25, 2016

The Intersection of Lawlessness and Justice: Police Misconduct -

Tuesday, March 3, 2015

A Recommendation for Eliminating Lifetime Tenure for Federal Judges -

Thursday, January 1, 2015

Admissions Panel A Great Success! -

Sunday, November 9, 2014

Law School Admissions Panel -

Monday, November 3, 2014

VICTORY OF THE MINORITY: The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Fight for Constitutional Rights -

Monday, June 30, 2014

VACATING CONVICTIONS: The Efficacy of One Form of Relief from the Consequences of Conviction -

Monday, June 30, 2014


Article submissions are now open for the Journal! Deadline: December 19!


WULR Volume VI, Issue III, Spring 2013

The Mystery and Complexity of Defending the Mentally Ill

Ariana Cernius
Harvard College

The defense of not guilty by reason of insanity has long been a subject of controversy. Many people dislike that this option is available in the American justice system because they believe it allows criminals to escape consequences for their actions. As a result, there has been much public outcry for a reformed version or alternative to the insanity defense. Alternatives include the reduction in the number of successful insanity defenses, as well as an intermediate verdict for those defendants who were clearly mentally ill at the time of the crime, but who did not meet all the criteria for an insanity plea. Although there is a need for an alternative, this paper argues that “Guilty But Mentally Ill,” the alternative verdict adopted by most states so far, is flawed and ultimately inappropriate to fill this role. GBMI has several theoretical flaws and is a difficult concept to understand for most juries, especially when juxtaposed with the insanity defense. Indeed, there should be an alternative verdict to the insanity defense, but this article argues that whatever form the alternative takes, it should be more transparent than GBMI’s services and implications.

To continue reading this article please refer to our “Ordering” tab and purchase your hard copy of this publication, or download an online copy from our “Issues” tab. Thank you.

Leave A Comment