Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Criminal Law (2)
- Immigration Law (2)
- Access to justice (1)
- Civil claims (1)
- Civil courts (1)
-
- Constitution (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Crimmigration (1)
- Death Penalty (1)
- Discriminatory Facially Race-Neutral Law (1)
- Duress (1)
- Economics (1)
- Equal Protection Clause (1)
- Filing Fees (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Immigration Detention (1)
- Immigration Jails (1)
- In forma pauperis (1)
- Intent Doctrine (1)
- International Law (1)
- Lethal Injection (1)
- Racism (1)
- Redress (1)
- Right to Petition (1)
- Right to file (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- US-Mexico Border (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Human Rights Law
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
No, The Firing Squad Is Not Better Than Lethal Injection: A Response To Stephanie Moran’S A Modest Proposal, Michael Conklin
No, The Firing Squad Is Not Better Than Lethal Injection: A Response To Stephanie Moran’S A Modest Proposal, Michael Conklin
Seattle University Law Review
In the article A Modest Proposal: The Federal Government Should Use Firing Squads to Execute Federal Death Row Inmates, Stephanie Moran argues that the firing squad is the only execution method that meets the requirements of the Eighth Amendment. In order to make her case, Moran unjustifiably overstates the negative aspects of lethal injection while understating the negative aspects of firing squads. The entire piece is predicated upon assumptions that are not only unsupported by the evidence but often directly refuted by the evidence. This Essay critically analyzes Moran’s claims regarding the alleged advantages of the firing squad over …
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 …
Systemic Racism And Immigration Detention, Carrie L. Rosenbaum
Systemic Racism And Immigration Detention, Carrie L. Rosenbaum
Seattle University Law Review
The denouement of the Trump presidency was a white supremacist coup attempt against a backdrop of public reawakening to the persistence of institutionalized racism. Though the United States has entered a new administration with a leader that expresses his commitment to ending institutionalized racism, the United States continues to imprison Central American and Mexican immigrants at the southern border. If the majority of the people in immigration jails at the border are Latinx, does immigration law disparately impact them, and do they have a right to equal protection? If they do, would equal protection protect them? This Article explores whether …
Duress In Immigration Law, Elizabeth A. Keyes
Duress In Immigration Law, Elizabeth A. Keyes
Seattle University Law Review
The doctrine of duress is common to other bodies of law, but the application of the duress doctrine is both unclear and highly unstable in immigration law. Outside of immigration law, a person who commits a criminal act out of well-placed fear of terrible consequences is different than a person who willingly commits a crime, but American immigration law does not recognize this difference. The lack of clarity leads to certain absurd results and demands reimagining, redefinition, and an unequivocal statement of the significance of duress in ascertaining culpability. While there are inevitably some difficult lines to be drawn in …