Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Public Law and Legal Theory (68)
- Constitutional Law (66)
- International Law (66)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (65)
- Jurisprudence (64)
-
- Legal Education (64)
- Contracts (63)
- Legal History (63)
- Civil Law (62)
- Courts (62)
- Law and Society (62)
- Supreme Court of the United States (62)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (61)
- Criminal Law (61)
- Law and Gender (61)
- Law and Politics (61)
- Rule of Law (61)
- Torts (61)
- Intellectual Property Law (60)
- Judges (60)
- Law and Economics (60)
- Law and Philosophy (60)
- Legislation (60)
- Administrative Law (59)
- Civil Procedure (59)
- Commercial Law (59)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (59)
- First Amendment (59)
- Institution
-
- Seattle University School of Law (57)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (9)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Claremont Colleges (2)
-
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (2)
- Notre Dame Law School (2)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (2)
- University of Michigan Law School (2)
- American University in Cairo (1)
- Boston University School of Law (1)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- Marquette University Law School (1)
- Portland State University (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- The University of San Francisco (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of the District of Columbia School of Law (1)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Keyword
-
- Law (13)
- SFFA (8)
- Affirmative Action (6)
- Common law (5)
- Diversity (5)
-
- Supreme Court (4)
- Tort Law (4)
- Negligence (3)
- Abortion (2)
- Constitution (2)
- Corporate Governance (2)
- Corporate Law (2)
- Corporate law (2)
- ESG (2)
- Education (2)
- Equality (2)
- Federalism (2)
- Fourteenth Amendment (2)
- Justice (2)
- Legal history (2)
- Legal scholarship (2)
- Pierre Schlag (2)
- Privacy (2)
- Race (2)
- Roberts Court (2)
- SEC (2)
- Securities (2)
- Securities Law (2)
- Stakeholder Governance (2)
- Stare decisis (2)
- Publication
-
- Seattle University Law Review (56)
- Dalhousie Law Journal (9)
- American University Law Review (2)
- CMC Senior Theses (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
-
- Touro Law Review (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- American Indian Law Journal (1)
- Brooklyn Journal of International Law (1)
- Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Emory Law Journal (1)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Georgia Law Review (1)
- Marquette Law Review (1)
- Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business (1)
- Northwestern University Law Review (1)
- Notre Dame Law Review (1)
- Notre Dame Law Review Reflection (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Performances, Events, and Presentations (1)
- Roger Williams University Law Review (1)
- Scholarly Articles (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- Texas A&M Law Review (1)
- University Honors Theses (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (1)
- University of San Francisco Law Review (1)
- University of the District of Columbia Law Review (1)
- Villanova Environmental Law Journal (1991 - ) (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 91 - 98 of 98
Full-Text Articles in Common Law
Overseeing The Administrative State, Jill E. Fisch
Overseeing The Administrative State, Jill E. Fisch
Seattle University Law Review
In a series of recent cases, the Supreme Court has reduced the regulatory power of the Administrative State. Pending cases offer vehicles for the Court to go still further. Although the Court’s skepticism of administrative agencies may be rooted in Constitutional principles or political expediency, this Article explores another possible explanation—a shift in the nature of agencies and their regulatory role. As Pritchard and Thompson detail in their important book, A History of Securities Law in the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court was initially skeptical of agency power, jeopardizing Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR)’s ambitious New Deal plan. The Court’s acceptance …
The Sec, The Supreme Court, And The Administrative State, Paul G. Mahoney
The Sec, The Supreme Court, And The Administrative State, Paul G. Mahoney
Seattle University Law Review
Pritchard and Thompson have given those of us who study the SEC and the securities laws much food for thought. Their methodological focus is on the internal dynamics of the Court’s deliberations, on which they have done detailed and valuable work. The Court did not, however, operate in a vacuum. Intellectual trends in economics and law over the past century can also help us understand the SEC’s fortunes in the federal courts and make predictions about its future.
Three Stories: A Comment On Pritchard & Thompson’S A History Of Securities Laws In The Supreme Court, Harwell Wells
Three Stories: A Comment On Pritchard & Thompson’S A History Of Securities Laws In The Supreme Court, Harwell Wells
Seattle University Law Review
Adam Pritchard and Robert Thompson’s A History of Securities Laws in the Supreme Court should stand for decades as the definitive work on the Federal securities laws’ career in the Supreme Court across the twentieth century.1 Like all good histories, it both tells a story and makes an argument. The story recounts how the Court dealt with the major securities laws, as well the agency charged with enforcing them, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the rules it promulgated, from the 1930s into the twenty-first century. But the book does not just string together a series of events, “one …
The Sffa V. Harvard Trojan Horse Admissions Lawsuit, Kimberly West-Faulcon
The Sffa V. Harvard Trojan Horse Admissions Lawsuit, Kimberly West-Faulcon
Seattle University Law Review
Affirmative-action-hostile admissions lawsuits are modern Trojan horses. The SFFA v. Harvard/UNC case—Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, et. al., decided jointly—is the most effective Trojan horse admissions lawsuit to date. Constructed to have the distractingly appealing exterior façade of a lawsuit seeking greater fairness in college admissions, the SFFA v. Harvard/UNC case is best understood as a deception-driven battle tactic used by forces waging a multi-decade war against the major legislative victories of America’s Civil Rights Movement, specifically Title VI and Title VII …
Feeding The Good Fire: Paths To Facilitate Native-Led Fire Management On Federal Lands, Kevin Burdet
Feeding The Good Fire: Paths To Facilitate Native-Led Fire Management On Federal Lands, Kevin Burdet
Seattle University Law Review
In 2003, nearly twenty Native American reservations were devastated by wildfires that originated on adjacent federal lands. The San Pasqual Reservation’s entire 1,400 acres were burned along with over a third of its homes, and seventy-five percent of the Rincon Reservation was burned, taking twenty homes with it. These devastating fires, along with others in 2002, brought about the Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004 (TFPA), which offered hope for Tribes to propose projects on bordering or adjacent federal lands and protect reservation lands in the process. Unfortunately, twenty years later, the TFPA has had a marginal effect in enabling …
Defeat Fascism, Transform Democracy: Mapping Academic Resources, Reframing The Fundamentals, And Organizing For Collective Actions, Francisco Valdes
Defeat Fascism, Transform Democracy: Mapping Academic Resources, Reframing The Fundamentals, And Organizing For Collective Actions, Francisco Valdes
Seattle University Law Review
The information we gathered during 2021–2023 shows that critical faculty and other academic resources are present throughout most of U.S. legal academia. Counting only full-time faculty, our limited research identified 778 contacts in 200 schools equating to nearly four contacts on average per school. But no organized critical “core” had coalesced within legal academia or, more broadly, throughout higher education expressly dedicated to defending and advancing critical knowledge and its production up to now. And yet, as the 2021–2022 formation of the Critical (Legal) Collective (“CLC”) outlined below demonstrates, many academics sense or acknowledge the need for greater cohesion among …
A Hard Pill To Swallow: The Abysmal Mental Health Standards Of Detained Immigrant Children In The United States, Rama Bankesly
A Hard Pill To Swallow: The Abysmal Mental Health Standards Of Detained Immigrant Children In The United States, Rama Bankesly
Seattle University Law Review
After setting foot into the U.S., unaccompanied children must learn to navigate academic and legal systems while receiving little support and carrying the heavy burden of effects of trauma on their mental health. They need access to mental health care from qualified professionals, but as this Comment will explain, they systematically fail to receive care, as can be seen in cases like Doe v. Shenandoah Valley Juv. Ctr. Comm’n. In Shenandoah, an unaccompanied child arrived in the U.S. and was placed in a facility that failed to provide remotely adequate mental health care and in fact was subjected …
Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez
Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, Steven A. Ramirez
Seattle University Law Review
The Roberts Court holds a well-earned reputation for overturning Supreme Court precedent regardless of the long-standing nature of the case. The Roberts Court knows how to overrule precedent. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA), the Court’s majority opinion never intimates that it overrules Grutter v. Bollinger, the Court’s leading opinion permitting race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Instead, the Roberts Court applied Grutter as authoritative to hold certain affirmative action programs entailing racial preferences violative of the Constitution. These programs did not provide an end point, nor did they require assessment, review, periodic expiration, or revision for greater …