Legal precedents and nursing: implications of four key court findings for the future of nursing jurisprudence in the United States

Background: Judicial precedents increasingly shape nursing practice, policy, and jurisprudence, yet their implications remain underexamined. Purpose: To discuss emerging case law and unpack how they will shape nursing jurisprudence in the United States. Methods: A structured search of eight legal databases was undertaken focusing on cases with implications for the nursing profession adjudicated from 2021 to 2024. Discussion: Four legal cases (Vaught, Loper, Talevski and Does) were identified. Vaught mandates organizational reforms to prevent errors, including technology safeguards and transparent error reporting. Post-Loper, agencies face challenges defending reimbursement policies or scope-of-practice rules without explicit statutory mandates. Talevski shifts power dynamics, requiring nursing homes to align operations with resident-defined quality metrics. Does affirms state authority to enforce public health mandates, prioritizing communal safety over individual exemptions during crises. Conclusion: The cases underscore a shift toward transparency reflecting a legal landscape increasingly shaped by patient rights, evidence-based mandates, and accountability.