Civil Procedure Commons^™

Volume 49 Masthead

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 49 Masthead

Esg Investing Breaches Erisa Fiduciary Duties? A Closer Look At Spence V. American Airlines, Inc., Eric Chin-Ru Chang

Seattle University Law Review

In Spence v. American Airlines, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas found that American Airlines breached its fiduciary duties due to BlackRock’s ESG investing practices. Contrary to some reports suggesting that the ruling prohibits ESG investing under ERISA, a closer look at the ruling shows that the court only targeted American Airlines’ failure to manage conflicts of interest appropriately, rather than the legality of ESG investing itself. In light of the intensifying ESG backlash in the United States, this Article cautions against further restrictive measures on ESG investing. Such measures would exacerbate the widening …

Mandating Fluoride: A Constitutional Exercise Of Police Power, Anita Jahangiri

Seattle University Law Review

This Note addresses the ongoing debate over fluoridation: the regulation of fluoride levels in public water systems. Extensive research indicates fluoridation, when regulated at the recommended concentration, is both safe and highly effective in preventing dental caries. Better known as cavities, dental caries is a preventable yet widespread health issue that disproportionately affects low-income populations. Reducing dental health disparities among economic classes is a pressing public health issue. Fluoridation is not merely a policy option, but a critical, proven tool to address such disparities and uphold the collective welfare of Washingtonians. This Note focuses on fluoridation as a public health …

Neurodiversity In The Courtroom: Expanding Jury Service Accessibility Beyond Physical Disability, Samantha L. Mabe

Seattle University Law Review

The Americans with Disabilities Act has required equal access to jury service for decades; however, efforts to accommodate jurors with disabilities have been slow to develop beyond some minor accommodations for physical disabilities. While neurodivergent people frequently struggle to navigate a world catered toward neurotypical people, jury service remains inaccessible for many neurodivergent people who need accommodations to attend trial and engage in jury deliberations. If courts and advocates do not consider how to develop accommodations to secure the service of neurodivergent jurors, they will miss out on the unique skillsets that neurodivergent people can bring to resolving disputes.

Disabled …

Fixing The Fix: The Case For Unifying The Remedial Framework Of Apa Rulemaking Challenges, Dea Devlin

Fordham Law Review

Vacatur is the default remedy for successful administrative rulemaking challenges brought under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Yet its broad and sweeping effects raise critical questions regarding its appropriateness as a one-size-fits-all remedy. Unlike injunctive relief, which is subject to a rigorous heightened standard, and remand without vacatur, which has a comparable standard of its own, vacatur is routinely awarded without similar scrutiny, leading to inconsistencies in the judicial application of remedies in APA challenges.

Although vacatur can provide a plaintiff with relief, its award conflicts with underlying principles of equity and proportionality. In rulemaking challenges, vacatur can create regulatory …

The Future Of Virtual Proceedings In The Federal Courts, Jeremy Fogel, Mary S. Hoopes

Indiana Law Journal

The federal courts are notoriously hesitant to modify their procedures and policies. Much of this “small c” conservatism is driven by a concern that their rules be “trans-substantive” and suited to a wide range of circumstances. For years, they stubbornly resisted allowing remote proceedings and similar uses of technology in the courtroom because of concerns that permitting them could affect the quality of lawyering and decision-making, compromise the safety of jurors and witnesses, and diminish the public’s perception of the courts. The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly changed this, forcing judges to alter radically the way they conducted proceedings.

Nearly five years …

Rethinking Courtroom Presence In The Virtual Era, Jenia Iontcheva Turner

Indiana Law Journal

Technological innovation has made virtual appearances by criminal defendants increasingly common. These appearances have advanced efficiency but also raised questions about the scope of both the right and the duty of defendants to be physically present in court. Should judges, for example, be allowed to hold virtual arraignments, even if a defendant wishes to appear in person? Can defendants opt for virtual appearances at will? While courts are beginning to address these questions, they have yet to develop a coherent framework to evaluate when virtual appearances are constitutional and appropriate. This Article seeks to contribute to this project by examining …

Civil Appeals Mediation Program 2024 Mediation Colloquy: 50 Years Of Building Bridges Through Appellate Mediation

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

On December 17, 2024, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and its CAMP program hosted Justice Sotomayor to celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the establishment of CAMP. During the Colloquy, the 50th Anniversary CAMP documentary video was premiered.

Managing Mdls: A Report From The March 2025 Mdl Case Management Convening At Stanford Law School, Nora Freeman Engstrom, Owen Foulkes, Brianne Holland-Sergar

Faculty Journal Articles & Other Writings

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) has quietly become the defining feature of the federal civil docket, now accounting for the majority of all pending cases. Yet the judges tasked with steering these sprawling matters confront an almost impossible assignment: They must manage hundreds of thousands of claims, often with skeletal staffs, little binding guidance, and enormous pressure to deliver both efficiency and justice. This report—produced out of a March 2025 convening sponsored by the Rhode Center at Stanford Law School—confronts that reality head-on. Drawing on candid discussions among leading judges, practitioners, and scholars, it dives into four central tensions that shape MDL …

Court Appointed Monitorships: Effective Remedy Or Modern Misstep?, Jean Joun

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

When a corporate entity or organization violates the law, there are several remedies the courts may enforce against the bad actor. Most common are damages—both compensatory and punitive—and injunctive relief. The class of injunctive relief that most are familiar with is the kind that restrains the bad actor from a conduct or behavior. However, courts in certain instances may decide, either on their own volition or after being asked to consider such a remedy by a prosecuting entity, to appoint a compliance monitor with the function of ensuring that the bad actor continues traversing a legally sound path. Although court-ordered …

Joinder, Not Jurisdiction: Toward A New Theory Of Standing, Adam N. Steinman

Faculty Scholarship

This Article builds on an important development in the Supreme Court’s standing jurisprudence to propose a novel theory that would allow more meaningful access to federal courts while vindicating legitimate separation-of-powers concerns. In its recent decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Supreme Court endorsed a theory of standing based on Article II, writing that litigation between private parties—even when explicitly authorized by Congress—can run afoul of the executive branch’s interest in “how to prioritize and how aggressively to pursue legal actions against defendants who violate the law.” This Article II move has been justifiably criticized. But it is …

27th Annual Open Government Summit: Your Guide To The Access To Public Records Act & Open Meetings Act (Powerpoint Slides) 08-01-2025, Attorney General State Of Rhode Island

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Volume 48 Masthead

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 48 Masthead

Keynote Address: Community Over Constitution, Riddhi Mukhopadhyay

Seattle University Law Review

In this keynote address, Riddhi Mukhopadhyay challenges the veneration of the U.S. Constitution by highlighting its origins in exclusion and its continued failure to protect marginalized communities. Drawing from her experience in civil legal aid and gender justice, she argues that the Constitution was drafted to consolidate power among white, wealthy men and continues to reflect that legacy through racial, gender, and class-based inequities. While acknowledging the significance of constitutional amendments and landmark cases, Mukhopadhyay emphasizes that meaningful change has always come from community-led action, not top-down reform. Additionally, Mukhopadhyay calls on lawyers and legal advocates to center community, practice …

The Lost Child: A Critique On Transracial Adoption Rhetoric, Hallie Conyers-Tucker

Seattle University Law Review

Transracial adoption in the United States reflects a deeply rooted history of colonialism, cultural assimilation, and racial hierarchy, masked by rhetoric focused on the “best interest of the child.” The author critiques that rhetoric and traces how adoption practices and policies, both domestic and international, have evolved to reinforce systemic inequities. Through historical analysis of the forced adoption of Native American, Black, and Asian children, it reveals how the best interest standard has been wielded not to protect children but to uphold political and racial ideologies. The author argues that the prevailing adoption framework relies on child-saving and color-blind narratives …

A Global Reconstruction: Black Internationalism And The Human Rights Regime, Britta Redwood

Seattle University Law Review

Black American advocates for civil, political, and economic rights have long taken an internationalist approach and fostered connections with international organizations and transnational movements. This engagement has also been a generative force and played role in shaping international law. Beginning in the early years of the twentieth century, Black intellectuals and leaders, spearheaded by the NAACP and the UNIA, focused on human rights as a means for addressing and repairing the harms wrought by slavery, Jim Crow, and racism. From the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Genocide Convention, and the drafting of …

The Gap: Addressing The Missing Piece In HawaiʻI’S Anti-Discrimination Laws On Credit And Lending, Wendy Mun

Seattle University Law Review

This author addresses the significant gap in Hawaiʻi’s anti-discrimination laws, specifically the lack of explicit protections for LGBTQ+ individuals against credit and lending discrimination. Although federal laws like the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) and recent interpretations by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) extend some protections, they remain vulnerable to shifting federal priorities and interpretations. The author explores how other states, particularly California and Washington, have enacted robust statutory protections that clearly prohibit credit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. They argue that Hawaiʻi, despite its large LGBTQ+ population, must amend its credit protection laws to reflect …

The U.S. Drug Policy Hamster Wheel: A Critical Discourse Analysis Of Seattle’S New Drug Ordinance, Hallie Conyers-Tucker

Seattle University Law Review

The author critically examines Seattle’s new drug ordinance using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to reveal how legislative language influences the policy's actual effect. Although the ordinance claims to prioritize diversion and community health, the use of permissive language such as “may” and “shall” grants broad discretionary power to law enforcement and undermines the stated intent. The author situates the ordinance within a broader historical context, highlighting how drug policy in the United States has consistently been shaped by racialized and stigmatizing narratives. Additionally, the author argues that meaningful reform requires reframing the discourse around substance use to support public health …

Something Concrete: How Labor Advocates Can Best Respond To The Ambiguity Of Glacier Northwest, Ateş Serifsoy

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court’s much-anticipated decision in Glacier North-west, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local No. 174 (Glacier) marked a critical moment for workers’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the longstanding practice of Garmon preemption. Yet, initial fears of a significant rollback of workers’ rights, driven by sensational headlines, were met with an unexpectedly narrow Court opinion. This Comment examines Glacier’s implications for Gar-mon preemption and the right to strike. It offers the historical background of the doctrine of labor law preemption before Glacier; presents a detailed analysis of Glacier itself, including its …

A New Exclusionary Rule To Protect Bodily Integrity And Discourage Pretext Stops, Josephine Ross

Seattle University Law Review

The author proposes a novel state-level exclusionary rule to reduce racial profiling and protect bodily autonomy during police encounters. The current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence fails to deter pretextual stops and frisks because the exclusionary rule often turns on officer fault and "good faith," allowing racially motivated practices to go unchecked. As federal rollbacks on diversity and data collection hinder efforts to track racial bias, the author argues for a statutory evidentiary rule that automatically excludes drug evidence found during (1) traffic stops, (2) pat-downs for weapons, and (3) consent searches, regardless of an officer’s intent or the legality of the …

Navahine V. HawaiʻI Dept. Of Transportation: The Keiki Will Lead Us, Catherine Smith

Seattle University Law Review

The author analyzes the landmark case Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation, which culminated in the world’s first constitutional climate settlement. Catherine Smith, serving as an expert for the youth plaintiffs, situates the case within Hawaiʻi’s legal tradition of prioritizing children’s rights and intergenerational equity. She explores the evolution of children’s constitutional protections, contrasting Hawaiʻi’s progressive jurisprudence with the dominant adult-centric legal framework on the mainland. She critiques four recurring analytical missteps in U.S. courts that marginalize children’s interests and highlights Hawaiʻi’s public trust doctrine and cultural values, such as the Aloha Spirit, as models for addressing climate-related harms. …

Constitutional Futurism As Pedagogy, Jeremiah Chin

Seattle University Law Review

Constitutional Law has transformed from a course on history to a discussion of current events. Cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo reveal that the study of constitutional law is not a static, or even linear, discussion of constitutional text and history. Law is a shifting, changing enterprise that reflects social constructions of power, authority, and identity. How do we teach, learn, and understand constitutional law that is so laden with history, riddled with theories of consistency and adherence to precedent, but ultimately subject …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Can The Law Protect My Craft? How Gaps In Copyright Of Knitting Patterns Symbolize A Greater Struggle For Protecting Traditionally Feminine Forms Of Intellectual Property, Kysa Walzer

Seattle University Law Review

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the application of intel-lectual property rights within the context of copyright protection of knit-ting patterns. The article will discuss the underutilization of copyright pro-tection for knitters and crafters and its larger impact upon craft and indus-try traditionally comprised of women. Part I introduces knitting patterns and a short history of copyright protections. Part II discusses the specific areas within knitting patterns and the knitting community which give rise to legal grey areas for copyright protection. Part III discusses the larger implications of copyright and intellectual property in spaces where women traditionally make …

The Gift Of Public Funds Bogeyman, Noah Purcell, Michelle Saperstein

Washington Law Review

Washington’s “gift of public funds” doctrine is frequently misunderstood in ways that impede innovative ideas aimed at remedying some of our state’s most intractable problems. This doctrine arises from article VIII, sections 5 and 7 of the Washington Constitution, which prohibit state and local governments from gifting assets or loaning credit. While the Washington State Supreme Court historically applied these provisions in restrictive and confusing ways, the Court’s modern jurisprudence recognizes that the doctrine is inapplicable to funding expended for any of the many “fundamental purposes” of government. Even where a government program does not fall under this broad category, …

Law School News: Destined For Law: From Legal Dream To Valedictorian 05-13-2025, Jane Govednik

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.

Preliminary Questions Of Fact: Respective Roles Of Judge And Jury In Maine Courts, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

Virtually indisputable in the law is the notion that the trial judge determines questions of admissibility of evidence. However, when admissibility depends upon the evaluation of a preliminary question of fact, both courts and commentators disagree as to whether the judge should continue to occupy the role of sole decision-maker. The intertwining of fact, the preliminary condition, and law, the admissibility decision, raises some havoc with accepted views of the judge as arbiter of the law and the jury as fact finder. If the judge determines both questions, he is resolving not only legal, but also factual issues traditionally within …

Cross-Appeals In Maine: Pitfalls For The Winning Litigant, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

The question of when a winning party must cross-appeal to challenge non-determinative findings in defense of a favorable judgment was answered for the first time in Maine in the recent case of Littlefield v. Littlefield. Noting a split of authority between the federal and state courts, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court unpredictably determined that an appellee must file a cross-appeal if he seeks to attack adverse findings which, if decided differently, would adequately support the judgment. In Littlefield, the court's objective was to provide notice to opposing parties. Recognizing that this end is a legitimate concern, the question here is …

No Lawyer, No Jail: A Critical Case Study Of Pragmatism And The Flaws Of “Purposeful” Decision Making In Argersinger V. Hamlin, Alisa Smith, Sarah K. Stice

Seattle University Law Review

By releasing conference notes and internal communications, Supreme Court Justices provide insight into the otherwise private decisionmaking process, shedding light on how case outcomes and legal reasoning are framed and negotiated. The watershed case of Argersinger v. Hamlin (1972) extended the constitutional right to counsel to some, but not all, misdemeanor defendants. The case was argued twice, and the Court relied on empirical and authoritative sources to answer complex and practical questions about requiring counsel. This case study employs critical discourse analysis to uncover what influenced the Justices’ decisions and how they framed, shaped, and constructed social realities to foreground …

The Race To Erase: Destruction Of Government Documents Undermines Freedom-Of-Information Laws, Frank D. Lomonte

Seattle University Law Review

In August 2019, reporters with Chattanooga’s daily newspaper, the Times Free Press, filed what seemed to be a routine request for access to emails and other public records held by their local county government. The seemingly unremarkable request set the newspaper’s staff on a months-long journey of unpleasant surprises. The first was a demand to pay the county $717 in advance before being allowed to inspect the documents. The second was that—during prolonged haggling over the fee assessment— the county attorney’s office simply destroyed almost all of the disputed records. Third, and most glaringly, the journalists discovered that Tennessee law …