Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (321)
- Criminal Law (292)
- Human Rights Law (269)
- Legal History (259)
- Other Law (257)
-
- Legislation (256)
- Criminal Procedure (253)
- State and Local Government Law (252)
- Law and Society (251)
- Administrative Law (249)
- Courts (244)
- Law and Gender (242)
- Land Use Law (236)
- Fourteenth Amendment (235)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (235)
- Jurisprudence (235)
- Labor and Employment Law (232)
- Intellectual Property Law (231)
- Property Law and Real Estate (229)
- Social Welfare Law (229)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (228)
- Immigration Law (227)
- Law and Politics (227)
- Juvenile Law (226)
- Natural Resources Law (224)
- Transnational Law (224)
- Family Law (223)
- Energy and Utilities Law (222)
- Keyword
-
- Constitution (41)
- First Amendment (40)
- Constitutional Law (26)
- Law (25)
- Washington (23)
-
- Fourth Amendment (16)
- Seattle University Law Review (15)
- Thirteenth Amendment (15)
- Slavery (14)
- Constitutional law (13)
- Privacy (12)
- Seattle University (12)
- Criminal Law (11)
- Discrimination (10)
- Fifth Amendment (10)
- Search (10)
- Seizure (10)
- Supreme Court (10)
- Race (9)
- Regulation (9)
- Evidence (8)
- Federalism (8)
- Fourteenth Amendment (8)
- Involuntary Servitude (8)
- Commerce Clause (7)
- Constitutional Law casebooks (7)
- Education (7)
- Original intent (7)
- Religion (7)
- SFFA (7)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 541 - 566 of 566
Full-Text Articles in Constitutional Law
An Analytical View Of Recent "Lending Of Credit" Decisions In Washington State, Hugh Spitzer
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
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, …
Confronting Child Victims Of Sex Abuse: The Unconstitutionality Of The Sexual Abuse Hearsay Exception, Katrin E. Frank
Confronting Child Victims Of Sex Abuse: The Unconstitutionality Of The Sexual Abuse Hearsay Exception, Katrin E. Frank
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment first analyzes Washington’s hearsay exception Act in the light of the principles that form the basis for the hearsay rule and its exceptions. It then examines the effect of the Act on the preexisting hearsay rules. Next, it compares the concept of unavailability as used in the hearsay exceptions with the concept of incompetence; both concepts are then analyzed according to the requirements of the hearsay rules and the confrontation clause. The Comment concludes that the Act is unconstitutional because it permits admission of hearsay of testimonially incompetent children.
Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State V. Parris Goes Too Far, James E. Beaver, Cheryl Mccleary
Inculpatory Statements Against Penal Interest: State V. Parris Goes Too Far, James E. Beaver, Cheryl Mccleary
Seattle University Law Review
This article first demonstrates that courts historically did not trust penal interest statements in general, and that courts were extremely suspicious of any statements by a third party that implicated the defendant. Since Washington adopted Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(3) verbatim, this article then analyzes the legislative history of the rule. The article concludes that the legislative history favored exclusion of inculpatory statements but that Congress failed to codify the exclusion because of unrelated problems. Finally, the article discusses the confrontation clause problems that arise when inculpatory statements are allowed into evidence. This article argues that the Parris holding should …
Freedom And Diversity In A Federal System: Perspectives On State Constitutions And The Washington Declaration Of Rights, Justice Robert F. Utter
Freedom And Diversity In A Federal System: Perspectives On State Constitutions And The Washington Declaration Of Rights, Justice Robert F. Utter
Seattle University Law Review
Increasingly, Washington courts are being asked to consider our Declaration as an independent and effective source of protection for individual rights, including some rights not recognized or protected by the United States Supreme Court, and to give our state constitution a truly independent interpretation. No matter how sympathetic they may be to such requests, lawyers and judges face at least three major problems in making a truly independent interpretation of a state constitutional provision. First, they must justify departing from precedents laid down by the United States Supreme Court, a step which makes many people understandably uncomfortable until the differing …
Constitutional Review Of Building Codes And Zoning Ordinances Applied To Parochial Schools: City Of Sumner V. First Baptist Church, Philip R. Meade
Constitutional Review Of Building Codes And Zoning Ordinances Applied To Parochial Schools: City Of Sumner V. First Baptist Church, Philip R. Meade
Seattle University Law Review
The First Baptist Church court should not have required strict scrutiny of either the building code or the zoning ordinance applications. In reaching its decision, the court incorrectly analyzed Supreme Court decisions construing the free exercise clause, and drew mistaken parallels between the two Sumner ordinances and laws that the Supreme Court has identified as burdening religious freedom. The court should have distinguished between generally applicable laws such as Sumner's building code and zoning ordinance that, in regulating the peripheral aspects of religious conduct, incidentally make a religious practice less convenient or more expensive, and laws that effectively penalize the …
Unbridled Prosecutorial Discretion And Standardless Death Penalty Policies: The Unconstitutionality Of The Washington Capital Punishment Statutory Scheme, James E. Lobsenz
Unbridled Prosecutorial Discretion And Standardless Death Penalty Policies: The Unconstitutionality Of The Washington Capital Punishment Statutory Scheme, James E. Lobsenz
Seattle University Law Review
This Article advances six reasons why Washington's statutory scheme for capital punishment should be deemed unconstitutional. The current death penalty statutes violate the separation of powers doctrine, the grand jury indictment clause of the fifth amendment, the equal protection clauses of the fourteenth amendment and article I, section 12 of the Washington State Constitution, the vagueness doctrine of the due process clause, and the doctrine of unlawful delegation of legislative power. Finally, it promotes an unequal administration of capital punishment in further violation of the guarantee of equal protection of the law.
Clear Standards For Discovery Protective Orders: A Missed Opportunity In Rhinehart V. Seattle Times Co., Carole J. Breitenbach
Clear Standards For Discovery Protective Orders: A Missed Opportunity In Rhinehart V. Seattle Times Co., Carole J. Breitenbach
Seattle University Law Review
The Washington State Supreme Court has previously balanced the interests of privacy and effective judicial administration against those of free speech and public access in the context of judicial proceedings, and the court missed a significant opportunity to expand and apply this balancing test in Rhinehart. The United States Supreme Court similarly declined to create a balancing test to ensure the full protection of First Amendment interests during pretrial discovery. A need remains for a general standard to ensure that First Amendment interests in disseminating discovery information are identified and protected when a protective order is requested.
The Dimensions Of A Journalist's Shield—First Amendment Protection For The Constitutionality Of News Sources Against Requests For Court-Ordered Disclosure In Civil Cases, Frank Van Dusen
Seattle University Law Review
This comment suggests a test in civil cases that enables a court to determine if there is a first amendment interest in protecting a source’s confidentiality. If a journalist can demonstrate this interest, then the burden shifts to the litigant seeking disclosure. This comments suggests three criteria through which the litigant must persuade the court that the state’s interest outweighs the first amendment interest. The test suggested by this comment should increase protection for the first amendment interest by decreasing the number of disclosure orders issued and by giving journalists and their confidential sources a basis for predicting in advance …
A Free Press: The Forgotten Issue In Home Placement V. Providence Journal, Robert J. Curran
A Free Press: The Forgotten Issue In Home Placement V. Providence Journal, Robert J. Curran
Seattle University Law Review
This Note demonstrates that the court's decision in Home Placement did infringe upon protected first amendment activity. Since free speech and free press guarantees were threatened by the government's action, the court should have balanced the competing interests and held in favor of Home Placement only upon a showing of a compelling state interest. After examining the interests of the advertiser, the reader, the government, and the newspaper, this Note concludes that the newspaper's right to control its message and to make editorial decisions free from the threat of governmental interference overbalance the antitrust claim made in this case. A …
Political Parties Before The Bar: The Controversy Over Associational Rights, Gary L. Scott, Craig L. Carr
Political Parties Before The Bar: The Controversy Over Associational Rights, Gary L. Scott, Craig L. Carr
Seattle University Law Review
This article will discuss the scope and nature of constitutional protection to be afforded political party autonomy by the first and fourteenth amendments. The purpose of the present discussion is to review both legal and political sides of this question. Once this is done it will become clear that a party right to protected autonomy during the candidate selection process is not only founded upon solid constitutional ground but is also in keeping with sound political wisdom.
Search, Seizure, And Section 7: Standing From Salvucci To Simpson, Mark H. Adams, George R. Nock
Search, Seizure, And Section 7: Standing From Salvucci To Simpson, Mark H. Adams, George R. Nock
Seattle University Law Review
This article traces the evolution of automatic standing from Jones v. United States to United States v. Salvucci and discusses the approach that has replaced the Jones rule in the Supreme Court. It then discusses the Washington Supreme Court’s continued adherence to the automatic standing rule, despite the Salvucci decision, under the Washington Constitution rather than the fourth amendment. After focusing on the failure of the United States Supreme Court to fashion a standing rule consistent with the Court’s stated purpose for the exclusionary rule, this article urges the Washington court to interpret the state’s constitution in a more consistent, …
The Court Years, 1939-1975: The Autobiography Of William O. Douglas, James E. Bond
The Court Years, 1939-1975: The Autobiography Of William O. Douglas, James E. Bond
Faculty Articles
This article is a book review that highlights William O. Douglas’s character and temperament, and suggests these very traits made his legacy on the Court a disappointment. Arguing that Douglas was uncommitted to judicial craft and simply championed cases close to his heart. The article bemoans Douglas’s lack of insight into constitutional adjudication, while noting the volumes anecdotal humor, the article cites the autobiography’s disingenuousness as cause to call it a work of fiction.
The State's Interest In Adoption And Washington's Sealed Records Statute, Eileen M. Lawrence
The State's Interest In Adoption And Washington's Sealed Records Statute, Eileen M. Lawrence
Seattle University Law Review
After discussing the legal effect of the adoption decree and the purpose of Washington's adoption statute, this comment will analyze the competing interests of the adoptee, the biological parents, the adoptive parents, and the state. This article will also discuss the legislative proposal in Washington attempting to abolish the good cause requirement. Finally, this article concludes the sealed records requirement is constitutionally sound and despite the need for further legislative articulation, the good cause balancing approach is the most suitable method for protecting the conflicting rights and interests inherent in the adoption process.
The Broadening Of The Pentagon Papers Standard: An Impermissible Misapplication Of The National Security Exception To The Prior Restraint Doctrine, Sherrie L. Bennett
The Broadening Of The Pentagon Papers Standard: An Impermissible Misapplication Of The National Security Exception To The Prior Restraint Doctrine, Sherrie L. Bennett
Seattle University Law Review
This comment examines the history of the national security exception to the prior restraint rule and discusses the elements of the Pentagon Papers standard in the context of the Marchetti and Progressive opinions. Application of those elements to the reasoning of the cases demonstrates the failure of these lower courts to follow the Supreme Court's strict view of when restraint is justified. Examining the theoretical basis underlying the first amendment, the comment concludes that strict application of the Pentagon Papers standard is essential to continuing protection of the American people's right to be informed of government activities.
Can The Boat People Assert A Right To Remain In Asylum?, Brian Roberts
Can The Boat People Assert A Right To Remain In Asylum?, Brian Roberts
Seattle University Law Review
World political reaction to the Southeast Asian refugee crisis has not asserted the refugees' human rights under international law. As a result, most of the refugees lack security from forcible return to the conditions they fled. They would have that security if the world powers act instead to implement non-refoulement, an established moral principle that arguably has attained the status of customary international law.
Marbury V. Madison, Lord Coke, And Dr. Bonham: Relics Of The Past, Guidelines For The Present—Judicial Review Intransition?, George P. Smith, Ii
Marbury V. Madison, Lord Coke, And Dr. Bonham: Relics Of The Past, Guidelines For The Present—Judicial Review Intransition?, George P. Smith, Ii
Seattle University Law Review
The purpose of this article is to explore the modern significance of Coke's influence as analyzed and interpreted through the famous Bonham's Case and thereby to provide an insight into the development of our own concepts of judicial review, as borrowed from the English, in its original historical legal perspective and as seen through the decision in Marbury v. Madison and applied modernly in the principle case of Baker v. Carr.
Parent-Child Privilege: Constitutional Right Or Specious Analogy?, Donald Cofer
Parent-Child Privilege: Constitutional Right Or Specious Analogy?, Donald Cofer
Seattle University Law Review
To avoid reaching incorrect verdicts as a result of insufficient evidence, courts generally require witnesses to testify to all relevant facts within their knowledge. Two important exceptions to this general rule, incompetency and privilege, rest on very different rationales. Developed at common law to exclude unreliable evidence, rules of competency disqualify certain untrustworthy witnesses from testifying. To promote extrinsic public policies, however, privileges excuse competent witnesses from providing what may be highly probative and reliable evidence. In the past decade there have been calls for legislative or judicial recognition of a parent-child privilege, similar to the marital privilege, that would …
Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.
Proposed Citizens Right To Standing Act-Finding The Keys To Unlock The Courthouse Doors, Harold W. Wood, Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
Recent Supreme Court decisions severely restrict the right of citizens to litigate in federal courts. The Court's standing requirements not only limit the ability of citizens to successfully invoke federal court jurisdiction, but also confuse lower courts and litigants attempting to apply the requirements. Standing requirements have met with increasing criticism. And Congress is now considering legislative modification of standing doctrine. Unfortunately, the Court's employment of constitutional foundations in establishing current standing requirements imposes substantial roadblocks Congress must avoid to enact remedial standing legislation. This comment examines the constitutional and pragmatic difficulties of statutory modification of standing requirements and recommends …
Gagging The Press Through Participant And Closure Orders: The Aftermath Of Nebraska Press Association V. Stuart, Valerie Bell
Gagging The Press Through Participant And Closure Orders: The Aftermath Of Nebraska Press Association V. Stuart, Valerie Bell
Seattle University Law Review
In Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart the Supreme Court held that trial courts trying to minimize prejudicial publicity to preserve a fair trial must consider alternatives less drastic than gagging the press. This comment will examine post- Nebraska Press cases involving orders that restrict the flow of information concerning judicial proceedings and will suggest standards that focus on whether an indirect gag order inhibits media coverage of the judicial process. After a brief discussion of Nebraska Press' reasoning and its emphasis on the prior restraint doctrine, a survey of lower court cases will demonstrate Nebraska Press has not prevented judges …
Status Of Student Practice Rules People V. Perez—An Initial Look At The Sixth Amendment, Catherine Walker
Status Of Student Practice Rules People V. Perez—An Initial Look At The Sixth Amendment, Catherine Walker
Seattle University Law Review
Despite the advent of the limited practice of law by law students as early as 1957, a California Court of Appeals in 1978 became the first court to examine the sixth amendment status of student representation in state criminal prosecutions. In People v. Perez, a California appellate court concluded that a lawyer-supervised law student, certified for limited practice by the California Student Practice Rules, is per se ineffective counsel in felony trials. Ostensibly to protect the defendant's right to effective counsel, Perez struck down the student practice rules without considering the proper function of certification in sixth amendment analysis. Moreover, …
United States Trust Co. V. New Jersey-State Promises And The Contract Clause: An Untimely Resurrection, Clifford D. Foster Jr.
United States Trust Co. V. New Jersey-State Promises And The Contract Clause: An Untimely Resurrection, Clifford D. Foster Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
This comment examines the impact of United States Trust on traditional contract clause doctrines and policies. After an initial discussion of the factual and legal background, a historical survey will show the decision employs a new approach to contract clause analysis. Next, this comment will analyze the Court's new approach, especially the Court's treatment of impairments when a state is a contractual party, its willingness to make policy judgments formerly left to legislative discretion, and the decision's probable effect on any future municipal debt crises. Finally, in accord with Justice Brennan's dissent in United States Trust, this comment will …
A Case For Judicial Balancing: Justice Stevens And The First Amendment, Richard G. Birinyi
A Case For Judicial Balancing: Justice Stevens And The First Amendment, Richard G. Birinyi
Seattle University Law Review
This comment discusses four of Justice Stevens's opinions that analyze first amendment issues. Two dissenting opinions in Splawn v. California and Smith v. United States deal expressly with obscenity, and reject the Court's present method of analysis. Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. and Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation both develop a balancing approach to ascertain the constitutionality of government regulation of nonobscene offensive speech. The comment concludes that Justice Stevens correctly identifies the factors necessary to insure proper Court protection of speech interests.
Equal Protection And Welfare Legislation: The Need For A Principled Approach, Lynda D. Frazier
Equal Protection And Welfare Legislation: The Need For A Principled Approach, Lynda D. Frazier
Seattle University Law Review
The Supreme Court decision in Maher v. Roe, denying an equal protection claim to Medicaid payments for elective abortions, illustrates the Court's inconsistent application of minimal rationality standards to socioeconomic legislation. This comment analyzes Maher in light of recent irreconcilable Supreme Court decisions involving similar equal protection claims to welfare payments. It shows that the Court's standard of review vacillates between deferential abdication to the legislature and unexplained judicial interventionism, and concludes that until the Court adheres to a consistent and principled approach to minimal rationality review, equal protection will remain an area for unrestrained imposition of judicial, rather …
The Duty To Decide Vs. The Daedalian Doctrine Of Abstention, Harlan S. Abrahams, Brian E. Mattis
The Duty To Decide Vs. The Daedalian Doctrine Of Abstention, Harlan S. Abrahams, Brian E. Mattis
Seattle University Law Review
It is the thesis of this article that the growing trend in the federal courts to refuse to exercise their assigned jurisdiction violates the doctrine of the separation of powers, and that the federal judiciary's excuses for refusing to perform their tasks do not pass constitutional muster. Specifically, this article will demonstrate that those excuses either do not rise to a level of constitutional concern sufficient to justify the trend or are based on a perversion of the admittedly constitutional concept of federalism, a concept affording the individual citizen a structural protection against arbitrary government in additionto the structural protection …
Libel: Taskett V. King Broadcasting Co.--A New Washington Standard, Roy W. Kent
Libel: Taskett V. King Broadcasting Co.--A New Washington Standard, Roy W. Kent
Seattle University Law Review
In Taskett v. KING Broadcasting Co., the Washington Supreme Court reevaluated the constitutional limits on libel law with regard to private individuals involved in matters of public interest, and held that private individuals can recover damages "on a showing that in publishing the statement, the defendant knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known that the statement was false." In adopting the reasonable care standard, the Washington Supreme Court sought to achieve an equitable balance between the media's first amendment rights of free speech and press and the state's interest in compensating private citizens for harm …