Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
Full-Text Articles in Law
“They Outlawed Solidarity!”, Richard Blum
“They Outlawed Solidarity!”, Richard Blum
Seattle University Law Review
In attacking § 8(b)(4)(ii)(B)’s ban on secondary labor picketing in support of a consumer boycott as a violation of the First Amendment, critics have repeatedly condemned the Supreme Court’s reliance on a supposed distinction between “pure speech” and “speech plus conduct,” such as a picket. The Court’s invocation of an “unlawful objectives” doctrine to defend banning speech contrary to public policy has also been repeatedly criticized. After all, picketing has been recognized as protected expressive activity and it is entirely lawful for consumers to choose to boycott the target of a picket. However, commentators have not sought to argue that …
Introduction: The Thirteenth Amendment Through The Lens Of Class And Labor, Maria L. Ontiveros
Introduction: The Thirteenth Amendment Through The Lens Of Class And Labor, Maria L. Ontiveros
Seattle University Law Review
The articles in this Symposium are arranged in three clusters. One cluster focuses on the definition of slavery and involuntary servitude and the reach of the Thirteenth Amendment in prohibiting oppressive labor relationships. Another cluster analyzes several positive class-based rights that emanate from the Thirteenth Amendment. The final cluster examines contemporary examples of oppressive labor that could violate the Thirteenth Amendment’s proscription against slavery and involuntary servitude.
The Thirteenth Amendment At The Intersection Of Class And Gender: Robertson V. Baldwin’S Exclusion Of Infants, Lunatics, Women, And Seamen, James Gray Pope
The Thirteenth Amendment At The Intersection Of Class And Gender: Robertson V. Baldwin’S Exclusion Of Infants, Lunatics, Women, And Seamen, James Gray Pope
Seattle University Law Review
In Robertson v. Baldwin, the Supreme Court held that merchant seamen under contract could be legally compelled to work notwithstanding the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition on slavery and involuntary servitude. According to the Court, seamen were “deficient in that full and intelligent responsibility for their acts which is accredited to ordinary adults,” and therefore could—along with children and wards—be deprived of liberty. Over the past few years, however, several courts have applied statutory bans on “involuntary servitude” and “forced labor” (a “species of involuntary servitude”) to protect women and children in domestic settings. These cases suggest that Robertson’s categorical exclusion is …
The Constitution And Slavery Overseas, George Rutherglen
The Constitution And Slavery Overseas, George Rutherglen
Seattle University Law Review
This Article examines the resources available under American law to address the issues raised by extraterritorial enforcement of one of the most widely recognized human rights—to be free from physical coercion and the loss of liberty. Part I reviews the history of adoption, interpretation, and enforcement of the Thirteenth Amendment. The scope of the Amendment gradually expanded through the joint efforts of Congress and the Supreme Court, resulting in a prohibition that now goes beyond involuntary servitude to all forms of peonage, whether supported by state or private action. Part II then looks to other sources of congressional power—the Commerce …
A Positive Right To Free Labor, Rebecca E. Zietlow
A Positive Right To Free Labor, Rebecca E. Zietlow
Seattle University Law Review
This Article seeks to resurrect a lost thread in our civil rights tradition: the idea that workers have a positive right to free labor. A positive right to free labor includes the right to work for a living wage free of undue coercion and free from discrimination based on immutable characteristics. Not merely the negative guarantee against the state’s infringement on individual equality and liberty, a positive right to free labor is immediately enforceable against state and private parties. A positive right to free labor is rooted in the Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude …
Is Modern Day Slavery A Private Act Or A Public System Of Oppression?, Maria L. Ontiveros
Is Modern Day Slavery A Private Act Or A Public System Of Oppression?, Maria L. Ontiveros
Seattle University Law Review
The government focuses on trafficking as the definitive form of modern day slavery. In doing so, it portrays modern day slavery as a private act with identifiable wrongdoers and views the Thirteenth Amendment through the lens of forced labor. Workers’ advocates, on the other hand, portray modern day slavery as a systemic form of oppression, supported by governmental policies on immigration and occupational exclusions. These groups focus on the Thirteenth Amendment through the lens of class. A historical analysis suggests that the proper approach views the Thirteenth Amendment through the lens of both class and labor.
The Last Legally Beaten Servant In America: From Compulsion To Coercion In The American Workplace, Lea Vandervelde
The Last Legally Beaten Servant In America: From Compulsion To Coercion In The American Workplace, Lea Vandervelde
Seattle University Law Review
Historically, the law of master-servant allowed corporal punishment. Today it seems strange to contemplate that intentionally inflicted violence was ever an acceptable method of compelling workers to labor in America. Strange as it seems, the practice of striking servants to discipline them was considered a legitimate, implicit part of the relationship between masters and servants. Servants, as well as slaves, could be subjected to cuffings and even severe beatings as means of “correction” and compulsion to labor. Menial servants, apprentices, and domestic servants could be beaten with hands, fists, straps, sticks, and sometimes whips, all in the name of correction …
A New Peonage?: Pay, Work, Or Go To Jail In Contemporary Child Support Enforcement And Beyond, Noah D. Zatz
A New Peonage?: Pay, Work, Or Go To Jail In Contemporary Child Support Enforcement And Beyond, Noah D. Zatz
Seattle University Law Review
Child support enforcement is one of several contemporary contexts in which the state threatens to incarcerate people if they fail to work. This symposium essay explores whether this practice violates the Thirteenth Amendment’s ban on involuntary servitude. At first glance, such threats fall squarely within the ambit of the early 20th century peonage cases. There, the Supreme Court struck down criminal enforcement of legal obligations to work off a debt. Several modern courts have declined to reach a similar conclusion when child support enforcement puts obligors to a choice between paying, working, and going to jail. To do so, these …
The Paradox Of The Right To Contract: Noncompete Agreements As Thirteenth Amendment Violations, Ayesha Bell Hardaway
The Paradox Of The Right To Contract: Noncompete Agreements As Thirteenth Amendment Violations, Ayesha Bell Hardaway
Seattle University Law Review
Employers in a variety of fields are increasingly imposing noncompete agreements on their workers as a condition of the workers’ at-will employment. These employees are working at or near minimum wage, in positions that require little or no advanced technical skills. Major news sources have highlighted this issue while covering recent employment litigation between Jimmy Johns and a pair of its former employees. In this litigation, two plaintiffs filed suit in federal court seeking injunctive relief and declaratory judgment invalidating the noncompete and confidentiality agreements that they signed with the sandwich maker. Granting defendant’s motion to dismiss, the Illinois District …
Building Labor's Constitution, Kate Andrias
Building Labor's Constitution, Kate Andrias
Articles
In the last few years, scholars have sought to revitalize a range of constitutional arguments against mounting economic inequality and in favor of labor rights. They urge contemporary worker movements to lay claim to the Constitution. But worker movements, for the most part, have not done so. This Essay takes seriously that choice. It examines reasons for the absence of constitutional argumentation by contemporary worker movements, particularly the role of courts and legal elites in our constitutional system, and it contends that labor’s ongoing statutory and regulatory reform efforts are essential prerequisites to the development of progressive constitutional labor rights. …