Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Court-packing (1)
- Criminal Justice (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Democracy (1)
-
- Democratic legitimacy (1)
- Democratic system (1)
- Drug Policy (1)
- Employment Law (1)
- Excessive Force (1)
- Federalism (1)
- Fifth Amendment (1)
- In Memoriam (1)
- Juvenile Offenses (1)
- Law review articles (1)
- Law-related scholarship (1)
- Legal podcast (1)
- Marijuana Law (1)
- Marijuana Law Reform (1)
- Marijuana Regulation (1)
- Medical Cannabis (1)
- Negligent Police Officers (1)
- Professor Emeritus (1)
- Public use (1)
- Qualified Immunity (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- Sentencing Guidelines (1)
- Takings clause (1)
- Young Offenders (1)
- Youth Offenders (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility
Court-Packing In 2021: Pathways To Democratic Legitimacy, Richard Mailey
Court-Packing In 2021: Pathways To Democratic Legitimacy, Richard Mailey
Seattle University Law Review
This Article asks whether the openness to court-packing expressed by a number of Democratic presidential candidates (e.g., Pete Buttigieg) is democratically defensible. More specifically, it asks whether it is possible to break the apparent link between demagogic populism and court-packing, and it examines three possible ways of doing this via Bruce Ackerman’s dualist theory of constitutional moments—a theory which offers the possibility of legitimating problematic pathways to constitutional change on democratic but non-populist grounds. In the end, the Article suggests that an Ackermanian perspective offers just one, extremely limited pathway to democratically legitimate court-packing in 2021: namely, where a Democratic …
Enough Is As Good As A Feast, Noah C. Chauvin
Enough Is As Good As A Feast, Noah C. Chauvin
Seattle University Law Review
Ipse Dixit, the podcast on legal scholarship, provides a valuable service to the legal community and particularly to the legal academy. The podcast’s hosts skillfully interview guests about their legal and law-related scholarship, helping those guests communicate their ideas clearly and concisely. In this review essay, I argue that Ipse Dixit has made a major contribution to legal scholarship by demonstrating in its interview episodes that law review articles are neither the only nor the best way of communicating scholarly ideas. This contribution should be considered “scholarship,” because one of the primary goals of scholarship is to communicate new ideas.
“Public Use” Or Public Abuse? A New Test For Public Use In Light Of Kelo, Taylor Haines
“Public Use” Or Public Abuse? A New Test For Public Use In Light Of Kelo, Taylor Haines
Seattle University Law Review
The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment has long been controversial. It allows the government to take private property for the purpose of “public use.” But what does public use mean? The definition is one of judicial interpretation. It has evolved from the original meaning intended by the drafters of the Constitution. Now, the meaning is extremely broad. This Note argues that both the original and contemporary meaning of public use are problematic. It explores the issues with both definitions and suggests a new test, solidified in legislation instead of judicial interpretation.
Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss
Excessive Force: Justice Requires Refining State Qualified Immunity Standards For Negligent Police Officers, Angie Weiss
Seattle University Law Review Online
At the time this Note was written, there was no Washington state equivalent of the § 1983 Civil Rights Act. As plaintiffs look to the Washington state courts as an alternative to federal courts, they will find that Washington state has a different structure of qualified immunity protecting law enforcement officers from liability.
In this Note, Angie Weiss recommends changing Washington state's standard of qualified immunity. This change would ensure plaintiffs have a state court path towards justice when they seek to hold law enforcement officers accountable for harm. Weiss explains the structure and context of federal qualified immunity; compares …
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents
Say “No” To Discrimination, “Yes” To Accommodation: Why States Should Prohibit Discrimination Of Workers Who Use Cannabis For Medical Purposes, Anne Marie Lofaso, Lakyn D. Cecil
Say “No” To Discrimination, “Yes” To Accommodation: Why States Should Prohibit Discrimination Of Workers Who Use Cannabis For Medical Purposes, Anne Marie Lofaso, Lakyn D. Cecil
Seattle University Law Review
This Article addresses the question of how the law should treat medical cannabis in the employment context. Using Colorado as a primary example, we argue that states such as Colorado should amend their constitutions and legislate to provide employment protections for employees who are registered medical cannabis cardholders or registered caregivers.
Part I briefly traces the legal regulation of cannabis from an unregulated medicine known as cannabis to a highly regulated illicit substance known as marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act. Our travail through this history reveals, unsurprisingly, an increasing demonization of cannabis throughout the twentieth century. That socio-legal demonization …
Washington’S Young Offenders: O’Dell Demands A Change To Sentencing Guidelines, Erika Vranizan
Washington’S Young Offenders: O’Dell Demands A Change To Sentencing Guidelines, Erika Vranizan
Seattle University Law Review
This Note argues that the O’Dell decision was a watershed moment for criminal justice reform. It argues that the reasoning in O’Dell should be seized upon by the legislature to take action to remediate instances in which defendants are legal adults but do not possess the cognitive characteristics of an adult sufficient to justify adult punishment. Given both the scientific impossibility of identifying a precise age at which characteristics of youthfulness end and adulthood begins and the Court’s repeated recognition that these very factors impact culpability, the current approach to sentencing young offenders aged eighteen to twenty-five as adults simply …
In Memory Of Professor James E. Bond, Janet Ainsworth
In Memory Of Professor James E. Bond, Janet Ainsworth
Seattle University Law Review
Janet Ainsworth, Professor of Law at Seattle University School of Law: In Memory of Professor James E. Bond.
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review
Seattle University Law Review
Table of Contents