Continuing on the topic of involuntary commitment, here is a good news story.
The decision ends by stating that the involuntarily hospitalization of a person is such a “massive curtailment of liberty,” it requires the state to meet a high burden of proof to hospitalize the person. The court found that the state did not meet that burden.
It seldom does. In this particular instance, the state actually appealed a lower court decision, so badly did it want to take away the liberty of a man who has not even committed a crime!