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

Law Commons

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

2006

Regulation

Seattle University Law Review

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

The Market Participant Doctrine And The Clear Statement Rule, David S. Bogen Jan 2006

The Market Participant Doctrine And The Clear Statement Rule, David S. Bogen

Seattle University Law Review

When the state acts as a market regulator, the dormant Commerce Clause invalidates discriminatory regulation without the need for an order against the state. The courts simply refuse to enforce the state law on the ground that it is unconstitutional. When the state acts as a market participant, however, the court would have to direct its order against the state or its officials to negate the discrimination. This produces a direct confrontation with the state, the same kind of confrontation the clear statement rule was designed to avoid. Part II of this article examines the theory of the dormant Commerce …


Restoring Property Rights In Washington: Regulatory Takings Compensation Inspired By Oregon's Measure 37, Kelly Michelle Kelley Jan 2006

Restoring Property Rights In Washington: Regulatory Takings Compensation Inspired By Oregon's Measure 37, Kelly Michelle Kelley

Seattle University Law Review

Part II of this Comment provides a background of regulatory takings jurisprudence, outlining both the U.S. Supreme Court's and Washington courts' respective analyses of regulatory takings challenges under the takings clauses of both the U.S. and Washington Constitutions. Part III discusses the threshold compensation statutes that have been enacted by four states in an effort to remedy the problem of regulatory takings. Part IV examines Oregon's Measure 37 and the lawsuit that validated its constitutionality. Part V analyzes Washington's proposed property rights measure, Initiative 933, and argues that Washington needs a regulatory takings compensation statute. Finally, Part VI concludes that …