Digital Commons Network^™

The Gm Food Debate: An Evaluation Of The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard And Recommendations For The United States Based On Food Justice, Courtnee Grego

Seattle University Law Review

This Note aims to identify the food justice issues caused by the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS) and make recommendations for the United States to minimize these concerns. The NBFDS requires the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to draft regulations establishing a mandatory disclosure standard for GM food and ultimately, will require a disclosure on the package of any GM food sold in the United States. Part I of the Note provides an overview of the genetically modified (GM) food debate. Part II reviews the NBFDS. Part III explains the food justice implications of GM food production. Part …

The Gm Food Debate: An Evaluation Of The Nationalbioengineered Food Disclosure Standard Andrecommendations For The United States Based On Foodjustice, Courtnee Grego

Seattle University Law Review

This Note aims to identify the food justice issues caused by the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard (NBFDS) and make recommendations for the United States to minimize these concerns. The NBFDS requires the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to draft regulations establishing a mandatory disclosure standard for GM food and ultimately, will require a disclosure on the package of any GM food sold in the United States. Part I of the Note provides an overview of the genetically modified (GM) food debate. Part II reviews the NBFDS. Part III explains the food justice implications of GM food production. Part …

Empowering Consumers And Investors To Choose A Sustainable Future, Olivier Jamin

Seattle Journal of Environmental Law

Compelled commercial disclosures have been an increasingly hot topic over the last few years, as illustrated by the GMO labeling controversy, finally enacted into law in August 2016. Typically, judicial challenges to such disclosure represent a clash between two distinct interests: the consumers’ “right to know” against companies’ freedom of speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Establishing a clear test to analyze the constitutionality of compelled commercial disclosures has proven difficult because of the Supreme Court’s confusing jurisprudence with regard to this issue.

This article aims at promoting two ideas. First, it seeks to refine the …

The Timing And Source Of Regulation, Frank Partnoy

Seattle University Law Review

The distinction between specific concrete rules and general abstract principles has engaged legal theorists for decades. This rules–principles distinction has also become increasingly important in corporate and securities law, as well as financial market regulation. This Article adds two important variables to the rules–principles debate: timing and source. Although these two variables are relevant to legal theory generally, the specific goal here is not to address and engage the rules versus principles literature directly. Rather, the goal here is to ask whether the debate about financial market regulation might benefit from a more transparent analysis of temporal and legal source …

Limits Of Disclosure, Steven M. Davidoff, Claire A. Hill

Seattle University Law Review

One big focus of attention, criticism, and proposals for reform in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis has been securities disclosure. Many commentators have emphasized the complexity of the securities being sold, arguing that no one could understand the disclosure. Some observers have noted that disclosures were sometimes false or incomplete. What follows these issues, to some commentators, is that, whatever other lessons we may learn from the crisis, we need to improve disclosure. How should it be improved? Commentators often lament the frailties of human understanding, notably including those of everyday retail investors—people who do not understand or …

Executive Certification Requirements In The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002: A Case For Criminalizing Executive Recklessness, Christopher Wyant

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment focuses on sections 302 and 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Section 302 requires Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and Chief Financial Officers (CFOs), or their equivalents, to personally certify the accuracy of financial disclosure filings required by the SEC and to vouch for the reliability of the internal corporate controls that produce that information.'4 Section 906 contains an additional certification requirement and provides specific criminal penalties for willful or knowing violations of that requirement.'" An efficiency-based analysis of these two sections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act suggests that including a recklessness standard of intent would be more likely to increase …

The Dimensions Of A Journalist's Shield—First Amendment Protection For The Constitutionality Of News Sources Against Requests For Court-Ordered Disclosure In Civil Cases, Frank Van Dusen

Seattle University Law Review

This comment suggests a test in civil cases that enables a court to determine if there is a first amendment interest in protecting a source’s confidentiality. If a journalist can demonstrate this interest, then the burden shifts to the litigant seeking disclosure. This comments suggests three criteria through which the litigant must persuade the court that the state’s interest outweighs the first amendment interest. The test suggested by this comment should increase protection for the first amendment interest by decreasing the number of disclosure orders issued and by giving journalists and their confidential sources a basis for predicting in advance …