Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Mccleary V. State And The Washington State Supreme Court's Retention Of Jurisdiction—A Success Story For Washington Public Schools?, Jessica R. Burns
Mccleary V. State And The Washington State Supreme Court's Retention Of Jurisdiction—A Success Story For Washington Public Schools?, Jessica R. Burns
Seattle University Law Review Online
No abstract provided.
The Opioid Litigation: The Fda Is Mia, Catherine M. Sharkey
The Opioid Litigation: The Fda Is Mia, Catherine M. Sharkey
Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)
It is readily agreed that federal preemption of state tort law alters the balance between federal and state power. Federal preemption is a high-profile defense in almost all modern products liability cases. It is thus surprising to see how little attention has been given to federal preemption by courts and commentators in the opioid litigation. Opioid litigation provides a lens through which I explore the role of state and federal courts and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in striking the right balance of power. My purpose here is not to resolve the divide among the few courts that have …
Associations And Cities As (Forbidden) Pure Private Attorneys General, Heather Elliott
Associations And Cities As (Forbidden) Pure Private Attorneys General, Heather Elliott
William & Mary Law Review
The Supreme Court interprets Article III’s case-or-controversy language to require a plaintiff to show injury in fact, causation, and redressability. A plaintiff who meets that tripartite test has standing to sue and thus a personal stake in pursuing the litigation. Accordingly, in Sierra Club v. Morton, the Supreme Court prohibited pure private attorneys general: litigants who would sue without the requisite personal stake. This limitation extends to organizations. They, too, must show standing on their own account or, under Hunt v. Washington Apple Advertising Commission, identify a member with Article III standing and show how the lawsuit is germane to …
Steiner V. Utah: Designing A Constitutional Remedy, Michael S. Knoll, Ruth Mason
Steiner V. Utah: Designing A Constitutional Remedy, Michael S. Knoll, Ruth Mason
All Faculty Scholarship
In an earlier article, we argued that the Utah Supreme Court failed to follow and correctly apply clear U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Steiner v. Utah when the Utah high court held that an internally inconsistent and discriminatory state tax regime did not violate the dormant commerce clause. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court recently declined certiorari in Steiner, but the issue is unlikely to go away. Not every state high court will defy the U.S. Supreme Court by refusing to apply the dormant commerce clause, and so the Court will sooner or later likely find itself facing conflicting interpretations of …
Legislators On Executive-Branch Boards Are Unconstitutional, Period, Douglas Laycock
Legislators On Executive-Branch Boards Are Unconstitutional, Period, Douglas Laycock
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Virginia statute makes legislators categorically “ineligible to serve on boards, commissions, and councils within the executive branch of state government who are responsible for administering programs established by the General Assembly.” But with increasing frequency, the General Assembly has enacted exceptions to this policy. There is a general exception for bodies “engaged solely in policy studies or commemorative activities,” and perhaps such bodies need not be in the executive branch at all. But the Assembly has also enacted exceptions for twenty-one specific boards and commissions, many of which clearly have executive authority. This list of exceptions is a miscellany with …
Narrowly Tailoring The Covid-19 Response, Craig Konnoth
Narrowly Tailoring The Covid-19 Response, Craig Konnoth
Publications
No abstract provided.
Disuniformity Of Federal Constitutional Rights, Joseph Blocher
Disuniformity Of Federal Constitutional Rights, Joseph Blocher
Faculty Scholarship
Judge Jeffrey Sutton’s 51 Imperfect Solutions describes and celebrates the crucial role of state constitutional law in “making” American constitutional law. The fact that states do not speak with one voice in doing so is, in Sutton’s account, a feature rather than a bug. The diversity in their approaches permits experimentation and tailoring, and ultimately produces a stronger and more supple constitutional fabric.
Sutton’s enthusiasm for the diversity and dynamism of state constitutional law is entirely convincing. But is the federal alternative quite so flat? Although federal constitutional rights are undoubtedly more uniform than those of states, they are not …