Law Commons^™

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 …

A Constitutional Critique On The Criminalization Of Panhandling In Washington State, Drew Sena

Seattle University Law Review

Individuals who have lost everything—their homes, jobs, and dignity—are often forced to live on the street. Those with no reasonable alternative can find themselves relying on the generosity of others just to survive. In response, citizens petition, legislatures enact, and officers enforce laws that criminalize signs of visible poverty. Municipalities have made considerable attempts to remove visible poverty from their cities by drafting legislation that disproportionately punishes people experiencing homelessness. This Note focuses on a particular subset of such legislation, laws that criminalize panhandling. Section I of this Note provides an overview of the First Amendment and the protection of …

"Home Rule" Vs. "Dillon's Rule" For Washington Cities, Hugh Spitzer

Seattle University Law Review

This Article focuses on the tension between the late-nineteenth century “Dillon’s Rule” limiting city powers, and the “home rule” approach that gained traction in the early and mid-twentieth century. Washington’s constitution allows cities to exercise all the police powers possessed by the state government, so long as local regulations do not conflict with general laws. The constitution also vests charter cities with control over their form of government. But all city powers are subject to “general laws” adopted by the legislature. Further, judicial rulings on city powers to provide public services have fluctuated, ranging from decisions citing the “Dillon’s Rule” …

License To Discriminate: How A Washington Florist Is Making The Case For Applying Intermediary Scrutiny To Sexual Orientation, Kendra Lacour

Seattle University Law Review

Over the past few decades, the debate over sexual orientation has risen to the forefront of civil rights issues. Though the focus has generally been on the right to marriage, peripheral issues associated with the right to marriage—and with sexual orientation generally—have become more common in recent years. As the number of states permitting same-sex marriage—along with states prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation—increases, so too does the conflict between providers of public accommodations and those seeking their services. Never is this situation more problematic than when religious beliefs are cited as the basis for denying services to …

Taxing Judicial Restraint: How Washington's Supreme Court Misinterpreted Its Role And The Washington State Constitution, Nicholas Carlson

Seattle University Law Review

In the realm of constitutional interpretation, the judicial department reigns supreme. League of Education Voters v. State exemplifies the judiciary’s potential abuse of its interpretative role: The Washington Supreme Court misinterpreted its judicial function because it ignored the text of Washington State’s constitution and held a statute unconstitutional. The court, therefore, voided a statute because of judicial volition, not because Washington’s constitution demanded that outcome. This Note challenges the reasoning in League and makes a novel suggestion for Washington State constitutional analysis, an approach that may apply to other states. This Note details a new analytical framework for constitutional analysis …

Framers Intent: The Illegitimate Uses Of History, Pierre Schlag

Seattle University Law Review

In this Article, I will present a series of attacks on intentionalism. My efforts are aimed at eroding the high ground that the intentionalist position appears to enjoy in the interpretation of state and federal constitutions. Currently, one almost has to justify departure from the framers intent in advancing a nonconforming constitutional interpretation. This Article is an attempt to reverse this assumed burden of persuasion.

An Analytical View Of Recent "Lending Of Credit" Decisions In Washington State, Hugh Spitzer

Seattle University Law Review

This Article first presents an analytic framework for assessing government actions that present possible violations of article VIII, sections 5 and 7, and then analyzes five recent cases interpreting those provisions.

The Right To Speak, Write, And Publish Freely: State Constitutional Protection Against Private Abridgment, Justice Robert F. Utter

Seattle University Law Review

This Article presents an independent analysis of a fundamental aspect of the free speech provision of the Washington Declaration of Rights, which closely resembles the free speech provisions of many other state constitutions. The focus is on whether the Washington free speech provision protects Washingtonians against abridgment of their speech and press rights by private individuals and organizations. To answer this question, this Article examines the nature of state constitutions and government, the case law of other jurisdictions interpreting similar provisions, the text of the Washington provision, the origins of the provision, the historical background of the Washington Constitutional Convention, …

The Washington Constitutional "State Action" Doctrine: A Fundamental Right To State Action, David M. Skover

Seattle University Law Review

The time is ripe to establish the nature of the Washington "state action" doctrine and its theoretical purposes, and to evaluate its capacity to serve the functions justifying its existence. This Article will perform this exegesis. This Article proposes the dismantlement of the Washington "state action" doctrine and the recognition that cases involving competing private claims of state constitutional liberties present justiciable controversies that must be decided by conscious and comprehensive judicial investigation of the merits.

Seizing Opportunity, Searching For Theory: Article I, Section 7, George R. Nock

Seattle University Law Review

Washington case law dealing with searches and seizures has now reached a developmental stage from which it can proceed either haphazardly or along any of several well-defined lines. The purpose of this Article is not to provide a compendium of Washington search-and-seizure cases. Rather, the Article analyzes the more recent (and some of the earlier) cases in which the Washington Supreme Court has interpreted article I, section 7, and suggests several alternative theoretical bases for the further development of Washington constitutional search-and-seizure jurisprudence.

A Constitutional Right To An Appeal: Guarding Against Unacceptable Risks Of Erroneous Conviction, James E. Lobsenz

Seattle University Law Review

The many consequences of "constitutionalizing" the right to appeal become evident only when one answers certain underlying questions about the nature of an appeal. What are the essential elements of an appeal? Why should we view the criminal defendant's right to appeal as an element of due process of law? Part II of this Article seeks to develop a theoretical due process framework for use in deciding when the right to appeal under article I, section 22 of the Washington Constitution has been unconstitutionally abridged or denied. Part III contains an analysis of oral argument as an essential element of …

The Establishment Clause And The Free Exercise Clause Of The Washington Constitution—A Proposal To The Supreme Court, Frank J. Conklin, James M. Vaché

Seattle University Law Review

This Article traces the independent development in the case law interpreting the Washington Constitution and in the drafting of the document itself. It is the position of the authors that the strict approach and consequent rigorous, independent analysis by the Washington court is not a necessary or appropriate method of deciding church-state issues, at least in many contexts. When examining establishment clause issues under the state constitution, the Washington State Supreme Court should therefore modify its previous position and adopt a more common-sense approach in lieu of the doctrinaire rigidity that has characterized prior opinions.

Washington's Equal Rights Amendment: It Says What It Means And It Means What It Says, Patricia L. Proebsting

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment begins with a discussion of the ERA's legislative history and the legislature's attempt to bring state statutes into compliance with the ERA upon its passage. Next, judicial interpretations of the new constitutional guarantee are compared to the interpretation of the Washington Constitution's privileges and immunities clause. Finally, the Comment compares Washington's standard of review with a similar standard used by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and argues that the Washington Supreme Court should adopt the absolute standard applied by the Pennsylvania courts.