Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Access to justice (1)
- Antitrust (1)
- Cannabis Law (1)
- Civil claims (1)
- Civil courts (1)
-
- Constitution (1)
- Criminal Justice System (1)
- Death Penalty (1)
- Dilemmas (1)
- Domestic Violence Services and the Law (1)
- Economics (1)
- Evidence (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- Filing Fees (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Force Confessions (1)
- Immigration Reform (1)
- In forma pauperis (1)
- Redress (1)
- Reverse Discrimination Claims (1)
- Right to Petition (1)
- Right to file (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- Systemic Racism (1)
- The Participation Principle (1)
- Witch Trials (1)
- Zoning Laws (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Civil Procedure
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents.
Why Do The Poor Not Have A Constitutional Right To File Civil Claims In Court Under Their First Amendment Right To Petition The Government For A Redress Of Grievances?, Henry Rose
Seattle University Law Review
Since 1963, the United States Supreme Court has recognized a constitutional right for American groups, organizations, and persons to pursue civil litigation under the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. However, in three cases involving poor plaintiffs decided by the Supreme Court in the early 1970s—Boddie v. Connecticut,2 United States v. Kras,3 and Ortwein v. Schwab4—the Supreme Court rejected arguments that all persons have a constitutional right to access courts to pursue their civil legal claims.5 In the latter two cases, Kras and Ortwein, the Supreme Court concluded that poor persons were properly barred from …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky
Rock And Hard Place Arguments, Jareb Gleckel, Grace Brosofsky
Seattle University Law Review
This Article explores what we coin “rock and hard place” (RHP) arguments in the law, and it aims to motivate mission-driven plaintiffs to seek out such arguments in their cases. The RHP argument structure helps plaintiffs win cases even when the court views that outcome as unfavorable.
We begin by dissecting RHP dilemmas that have long existed in the American legal system. As Part I reveals, prosecutors and law enforcement officials have often taken advantage of RHP dilemmas and used them as a tool to persuade criminal defendants to forfeit their constitutional rights, confess, or give up the chance to …