Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Black Law Student Association (5)
- Black Law Students (5)
- Black Laywers (5)
- Seattle University Law Review (5)
- Symposium (5)
-
- Appointments Clause (2)
- Black Law Deans (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Supreme Court (2)
- Access to justice (1)
- Agency action (1)
- Appointments Clause challenges (1)
- Black Lawyers (1)
- Blockchain (1)
- Civil Claims (1)
- Civil claims (1)
- Civil courts (1)
- Constitutional claims (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Copyright Infringement (1)
- D.C. Circuit (1)
- D.C. Circuit Court (1)
- Doctrine of Ratification (1)
- Economics (1)
- Federal Courts (1)
- Filing Fees (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- In forma pauperis (1)
- Marissa Jackson Sow (1)
- NRA political fund (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents and Special Thanks.
Marissa Jackson Sow’S “Whiteness As Contract”, Marissa Jackson Sow
Marissa Jackson Sow’S “Whiteness As Contract”, Marissa Jackson Sow
Seattle University Law Review
Marissa Jackson Sow’s “Whiteness as Contract.”
Closing Remarks, Dontay Proctor-Mills
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 …
Neither Safe, Nor Legal, Nor Rare: The D.C. Circuit’S Use Of The Doctrine Of Ratification To Shield Agency Action From Appointments Clause Challenges, Damien M. Schiff
Neither Safe, Nor Legal, Nor Rare: The D.C. Circuit’S Use Of The Doctrine Of Ratification To Shield Agency Action From Appointments Clause Challenges, Damien M. Schiff
Seattle University Law Review
Key to the constitutional design of the federal government is the separation of powers. An important support for that separation is the Appointments Clause, which governs how officers of the United States are installed in their positions. Although the separation of powers generally, and the Appointments Clause specifically, support democratically accountable government, they also protect individual citizens against abusive government power. But without a judicial remedy, such protection is ineffectual—a mere parchment barrier.
Such has become the fate of the Appointments Clause in the D.C. Circuit, thanks to that court’s adoption—and zealous employment—of the rule that agency action, otherwise unconstitutional …
Foreword, Seattle University Law Review
Introductory Remarks, Michael Rogers, Hannah Hamley, Rayshaun D. Williams
Introductory Remarks, Michael Rogers, Hannah Hamley, Rayshaun D. Williams
Seattle University Law Review
Introductory Remarks.
The Deans' Roundtable, Dean Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Dean Danielle Conway, Dean Tamara Lawson, Dean Mario Barnes, Dean L. Song Richardson
The Deans' Roundtable, Dean Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Dean Danielle Conway, Dean Tamara Lawson, Dean Mario Barnes, Dean L. Song Richardson
Seattle University Law Review
The Deans' Roundtable.