Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Constitutional Law

University of Washington School of Law

Journal

2010

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

No Direction Home: Constitutional Limitations On Washington's Homeless Encampment Ordinances, Jordan Talge Nov 2010

No Direction Home: Constitutional Limitations On Washington's Homeless Encampment Ordinances, Jordan Talge

Washington Law Review

The Washington State Constitution protects the free exercise of religion. It also vests strong police power in local governments. When these two constitutional provisions conflict, the Washington State Supreme Court must draw the line between valid police power action and impermissible burden on free exercise. In City of Woodinville v. Northshore United Church of Christ, a municipal government crossed that line. The City of Woodinville, Washington refused to consider a church’s application to host a homeless encampment. The Court held this outright refusal to be an unjustified infringement on the church’s free exercise of religion. The Court did not, …


The Misapplication Of Leung Kwok Hung In Hong Kong: Authorizing The Rationality Requirement For Textually Absolute Rights, Albert Connor Buchman Jul 2010

The Misapplication Of Leung Kwok Hung In Hong Kong: Authorizing The Rationality Requirement For Textually Absolute Rights, Albert Connor Buchman

Washington International Law Journal

The Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance (BORO) guarantees many fundamental rights to Hong Kong’s permanent residents. In these constitutionally significant statutes, two types of rights exist: 1) textually qualified rights, which contain qualifying language indicating for what purposes a legislated restriction is permissible, such as when necessary for national security, public order, public health or morals, and 2) textually absolute rights, which contain no language indicating when a legislated restriction on that right is permissible. In Leung Kwok Hung & Others v. HKSAR, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal formulated a rationality requirement for when restrictions are …


Mōri V. Japan: The Nagoya High Court Recognizes The Right To Live In Peace, Hudson Hamilton Jul 2010

Mōri V. Japan: The Nagoya High Court Recognizes The Right To Live In Peace, Hudson Hamilton

Washington International Law Journal

The following is a translation of the Nagoya High Court’s decision in Mōri v. Japan, a case challenging the constitutionality of Japan’s deployment of its Self-Defense Forces (“SDF”) to the Middle East in connection with the United States-led occupation of Iraq. Beginning in December of 2003, Japan deployed ground and air forces of the SDF to the Middle East, including three C-130H “Hercules” transport aircraft which were used to airlift coalition forces and supplies between Kuwait and Baghdad. In response, more than 5,700 citizens, represented by over 800 attorneys, filed lawsuits in eleven district courts across the country in …


Arrested Development: Arizona V. Gant And Article I, Section 7 Of The Washington State Constitution, Jacob R. Brown May 2010

Arrested Development: Arizona V. Gant And Article I, Section 7 Of The Washington State Constitution, Jacob R. Brown

Washington Law Review

In Arizona v. Gant, the United States Supreme Court held that the search of a vehicle incident to arrest is permissible in only two situations: (1) when the arrestee is unsecured and within reaching distance of the passenger compartment; or (2) when it is reasonable to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest may be found in the vehicle. Because Gant expressed a standard more protective than that established by the Washington State Supreme Court, Gant induced a state of confusion in Washington, where it has long been maintained that article I, section 7 of the Washington …


Freedom Of Speech In School And Prison, Aaron H. Caplan Feb 2010

Freedom Of Speech In School And Prison, Aaron H. Caplan

Washington Law Review

Students often compare their schools unfavorably to prisons, most often in a tone of rueful irony. By contrast, judicial opinions about freedom of speech within government-run institutions compare schools and prisons without irony or even hesitation. This Article considers whether the analogy between school and prison in free speech cases is evidence that the two institutions share a joint mission. At a macro level, there is an undeniable structural similarity between the constitutional speech rules for schools and prisons. At a micro level, however, there are subtle but significant differences between the two. These arise primarily from the judiciary’s belief …