Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Human Rights Law

Economics

Seattle University Law Review

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

“‘Made In China’ . . . Is A Warning Label”: Is America Doing Enough?, Devin Kathleen Epp Jan 2022

“‘Made In China’ . . . Is A Warning Label”: Is America Doing Enough?, Devin Kathleen Epp

Seattle University Law Review

This Note explores China’s repressive actions against the Uyghur population and calls upon the U.S. to address these human rights violations. Part I discusses the background and human rights violations in Xinjiang, also known as the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR). Part II addresses U.S. economic regulations and sanctions imposed against actors involved in Xinjiang’s forced labor industry. Part III analyzes previous U.S. strategies and sanction regimes implemented to combat human rights violations in other countries. This Note recommends that the U.S. implement a more robust multilateral framework to combat the Xinjiang cultural genocide and impose secondary sanctions against China …


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 Jan 2021

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 …