Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
School “Safety” Measures Jump Constitutional Guardrails, Maryam Ahranjani
School “Safety” Measures Jump Constitutional Guardrails, Maryam Ahranjani
Seattle University Law Review
In the wake of George Floyd’s murder and efforts to achieve racial justice through systemic reform, this Article argues that widespread “security” measures in public schools, including embedded law enforcement officers, jump constitutional guardrails. These measures must be rethought in light of their negative impact on all children and in favor of more effective—and constitutionally compliant—alternatives to promote school safety. The Black Lives Matter, #DefundthePolice, #abolishthepolice, and #DefundSchoolPolice movements shine a timely and bright spotlight on how the prisonization of public schools leads to the mistreatment of children, particularly children with disabilities, boys, Black and brown children, and low-income children. …
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: The Court’S Premier Defender Of The Fourth Amendment, David L. Hudson Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
This essay posits that Justice Sotomayor is the Court’s chief defender of the Fourth Amendment and the cherished values it protects. She has consistently defended Fourth Amendment freedoms—in majority, concurring, and especially in dissenting opinions. Part I recounts a few of her majority opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. Part II examines her concurring opinion in United States v. Jones. Part III examines several of her dissenting opinions in Fourth Amendment cases. A review of these opinions demonstrates what should be clear to any observer of the Supreme Court: Justice Sotomayor consistently defends Fourth Amendment principles and values.
Preservation Requests And The Fourth Amendment, Armin Tadayon
Preservation Requests And The Fourth Amendment, Armin Tadayon
Seattle University Law Review
Every day, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Amazon, ridesharing companies, and numerous other service providers copy users’ account information upon receiving a preservation request from the government. These requests are authorized under a relatively obscure subsection of the Stored Communications Act (SCA). The SCA is the federal statute that governs the disclosure of communications stored by third party service providers. Section 2703(f) of this statute authorizes the use of “f” or “preservation” letters, which enable the government to request that a service provider “take all necessary steps to preserve records and other evidence in its possession” while investigators seek valid legal process. …
Recalibrating Suspicion In An Era Of Hazy Legality, Deborah Ahrens
Recalibrating Suspicion In An Era Of Hazy Legality, Deborah Ahrens
Seattle University Law Review
After a century of employing varying levels of prohibition enforced by criminal law, the United States has entered an era where individual states are rethinking marijuana policy, and the majority of states have in some way decided to make cannabis legally available. This symposium Article will offer a description of what has happened in the past few years, as well as ideas for how jurisdictions can use the changing legal status of cannabis to reshape criminal procedure more broadly. This Article will recommend that law enforcement no longer be permitted use the smell of marijuana as a reason to search …
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2013 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson, Justice Debra L. Stephens
Seattle University Law Review
This survey is intended to serve as a resource to which Washington lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers, and others can turn as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, this Survey requires periodic updates to address new cases interpreting the Washington constitution and the U.S. Constitution and to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington State Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Washington constitution. Also, as the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence, its …
“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz
“Lonesome Road”: Driving Without The Fourth Amendment, Lewis R. Katz
Seattle University Law Review
The protections of the Fourth Amendment on the streets and highways of America have been drastically curtailed. This Article traces the debasement of Fourth Amendment protections on the road and how the Fourth Amendment’s core value of preventing arbitrary police behavior has been marginalized. This Article contends that the existence of a traffic offense should not be the end of the inquiry but the first step, and that defendants should be able to challenge the reasonableness even when there is proof of a traffic offense.
O.P.P.: How "Occupy's" Race-Based Privilege May Improve Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence For All, Lenese C. Herbert
O.P.P.: How "Occupy's" Race-Based Privilege May Improve Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence For All, Lenese C. Herbert
Seattle University Law Review
This Article submits that Occupy’s race problem could, ironically, prove to be a solution if protesters grow more serious about exposing the injury of political subordination and systems of privilege that adhere to the criminal justice system. Privilege is a “systemic conferral of benefit and advantage [as a result of] affiliation, conscious or not and chosen or not, to the dominant side of a power system.” Accordingly, now that police mistreatment affects them personally, Occupy may finally help kill a fictitious Fourth Amendment jurisprudence that ignores oppression through improper policing based on racial stigma. Occupy may also help usher in …
Great (And Reasonable) Expectations: Fourth Amendment Protection For Attorney-Client Communications, Teri J. Dobbins
Great (And Reasonable) Expectations: Fourth Amendment Protection For Attorney-Client Communications, Teri J. Dobbins
Seattle University Law Review
Most motor vehicle crashes are traceable to “some failure of judgment that fully reveals its dangers only when it is too late. That is precisely why they are accidents.” For example, speeding is one of the most prevalent factors contributing to vehicular crashes. Although especially deadly when combined with driver intoxication, speeding is a significant contributing factor in fatal crashes involving sober drivers. Part II of this Article briefly discusses the development of accident insurance. It examines courts' struggles in determining whether an insured's death was an accident for purposes of awarding accidental death benefits, and approaches to resolving this …
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2005 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 2005 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson
Seattle University Law Review
This article serves as a source to which the Washington lawyer, judge, law enforcement officer, and others can turn to as an authoritative starting point for researching Washington search and seizure law. In order to be useful as a research tool, revisions to the law and new cases interpreting the Washington Constitution and the United States Constitution require periodic updates to this Survey to reflect the current state of the law. Many of these cases involve the Washington Supreme Court's interpretation of the Washington Constitution. Also, as the United States Supreme Court has continued to examine Fourth Amendment search and …
Rethinking Canine Sniffs: The Impact Of Kyllo V. United States, Amanda S. Froh
Rethinking Canine Sniffs: The Impact Of Kyllo V. United States, Amanda S. Froh
Seattle University Law Review
The argument develops as follows. Part II provides a general background on how the court has determined whether an investigative technique or device is a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, and the implications for finding that something is a search. This section focuses primarily on Katz v. United States, the pivotal case in which the Supreme Court departed from previous Fourth Amendment jurisprudence by recognizing that the Fourth Amendment's core value is the protection of individual privacy, not the protection of places. In light of this background, Part III provides examples of how the Supreme Court has …
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 1998 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson
Survey Of Washington Search And Seizure Law: 1998 Update, Justice Charles W. Johnson
Seattle University Law Review
This Survey, as did the previous Surveys, summarizes the predominant treatment of search and seizure issues under the Fourth Amendment and under article I, section 7 of the Washington State Constitution to the extent that this state's provision is interpreted differently from the federal provision. The Survey focuses primarily on substantive search and seizure law in the criminal context; it omits discussion of many procedural issues.
Dropping Anchor: Defining A Search In Compliance With Article I, Section 7 Of The Washington State Constitution, Daniel J. Clark
Dropping Anchor: Defining A Search In Compliance With Article I, Section 7 Of The Washington State Constitution, Daniel J. Clark
Seattle University Law Review
Section II examines State v. Myrick itself, including the Washington Supreme Court's path that led to that decision, the facts of the case, its reasoning, and its holding. Section III discusses the reaction to and effects of Myrick, including the seemingly disingenuous and inconsistent cases that have followed Myrick. Section IV outlines a proposal that more precisely defines a search in Washington, discussing the sources of the proposed test, examining how it would help guide Washington courts, and explaining which cases would be decided differently using the proposed standard.
Washington Constitution Article 1, Section 7: The Argument For Broader Protection Against Employer Drug Testing, Ken Davis
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment will analyze Article 1, Section 7 of the Washington Constitution, the search and seizure provision, and conclude that this provision should be construed to provide greater protection to employees against employer drug testing absent individualized suspicion than the Fourth Amendment does. The scope of this Comment, however, is limited to the rights of state employees with respect to suspicionless drug testing. The rights of federal employees are not included in this analysis because they are protected against suspicionless drug testing only by the Fourth Amendment, not by the analogous Washington provision. Moreover, Article 1, Section 7, like the …