Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (244)
- Criminal Law (235)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (232)
- Law and Society (229)
- State and Local Government Law (225)
-
- Jurisprudence (223)
- Legislation (219)
- Judges (218)
- Supreme Court of the United States (213)
- Legal History (212)
- Criminal Procedure (211)
- Other Law (211)
- Jurisdiction (210)
- Law and Race (210)
- Legal Education (210)
- Civil Law (209)
- Common Law (209)
- Legal Profession (209)
- Law and Politics (205)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (205)
- Evidence (204)
- Litigation (204)
- Civil Procedure (203)
- Law and Economics (202)
- Juvenile Law (201)
- Law and Gender (201)
- Rule of Law (201)
- Human Rights Law (200)
- Keyword
-
- Law (13)
- Washington (12)
- Constitution (11)
- Seattle University Law Review (10)
- Constitutional Law (9)
-
- Supreme Court (8)
- SFFA (7)
- Symposium (7)
- Affirmative Action (6)
- Criminal Justice (6)
- ESG (6)
- First Amendment (6)
- Privacy (6)
- Race (6)
- Regulation (6)
- Black Law Student Association (5)
- Black Law Students (5)
- Black Laywers (5)
- Constitutional law (5)
- Diversity (5)
- Seattle University (5)
- Securities and exchange commission (5)
- Technology (5)
- Addiction (4)
- Antitrust (4)
- Artificial intelligence (4)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Criminal law (4)
- Discrimination (4)
- Fourteenth Amendment (4)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 331 - 360 of 362
Full-Text Articles in Courts
Youth Justice In A Unified Court: Response To Critics Of Juvenile Court Abolition, Janet Ainsworth
Youth Justice In A Unified Court: Response To Critics Of Juvenile Court Abolition, Janet Ainsworth
Faculty Articles
In this article, Professor Ainsworth argues that a unified criminal justice system is preferable to our present two-tiered adult-juvenile court system. In fact, she contends that the cultural and ideological assumptions that underpin the current two-tiered justice system not only engender many of the serious shortcomings of the juvenile justice system, but also serve to exacerbate the very policies and practices of the adult criminal justice system that make it so abhorrent to defenders of the juvenile court. Critics of juvenile court abolitionists thus miss the point when they argue that juveniles would be worse off than they are at …
On Comparing Apples And Oranges: The Judicial Clerkship Selection Process And The Medical Matching Model, Annette E. Clark
On Comparing Apples And Oranges: The Judicial Clerkship Selection Process And The Medical Matching Model, Annette E. Clark
Faculty Articles
In this article, Professor Clark joins the debate over whether the federal judiciary should utilize the medical matching model to reform the judicial clerk selection process. She analyzes the medical experience with the residency match in order to detail the ways in which proponents of a judicial clerk match have overstated the benefits, underestimated the costs, and overlooked the differing and potentially conflicting interests of judges and clerkship applicants in the selection process. Professor Clark concludes that reform of the judicial clerk selection process should be guided by a realistic appraisal of the costs and benefits of a matching system.
Juvenile Detention Law In The District Of Columbia: A Practitioner’S Guide, Paul Holland, John Copacino, Milton Lee
Juvenile Detention Law In The District Of Columbia: A Practitioner’S Guide, Paul Holland, John Copacino, Milton Lee
Faculty Articles
On each and every day of the year (excluding Sundays), children are presented for an initial hearing in the Family Division, Juvenile Branch of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Because of unusually broad and often misapplied preventive detention laws, children charged with property offenses such as theft, or status offenses such as truancy and ungovernability, are subject to detention for an indefinite period of time through summary procedures which do not adequately ensure the reliability of the detention decision. Because the detention of juveniles has become routine in superior court, its potential harm to the child is …
Whatever Happened To The Right To Treatment: The Modern Quest For An Historical Promise, Paul Holland, Wallace Mlyniec
Whatever Happened To The Right To Treatment: The Modern Quest For An Historical Promise, Paul Holland, Wallace Mlyniec
Faculty Articles
Since the creation of the first juvenile court in 1899, state training schools have been the primary place of confinement for children removed from their homes. In theory such places were supposed to be home-like and rehabilitative in their facilities and care. In reality they were usually impersonal, understaffed, unhealthy, and even dangerous institutions, devoid of rehabilitative programs. From the late 1960s to the early 1980s, advocates for children pursued legislative and other policy reforms. They argued that children in state institutions had both a statutory and constitutional right to treatment. In this context, the authors of this article reassess …
When Words Fail Me: Diagramming The Rule Against Perpetuities, Mark Reutlinger
When Words Fail Me: Diagramming The Rule Against Perpetuities, Mark Reutlinger
Faculty Articles
Professor Reutlinger discusses the difficulties in teaching the Rule Against Perpetuities—the rule does not lend itself to mere verbal explanation and therefore makes it difficult to teach only through the Socratic method. In this article he offers an explanation and various examples of his "bridging the gap" diagrams as he now uses them in his classroom discussions on the Rule Against Perpetuities.
Snake Pits And Unseen Actors: Constitutional Liability For Indirect Harm, Julie Shapiro
Snake Pits And Unseen Actors: Constitutional Liability For Indirect Harm, Julie Shapiro
Faculty Articles
The purpose of this article is to find order amidst the chaos that predominates in analysis of indirect harm cases. It is the author’s hope that such an effort will assist courts, scholars, and advocates who continue to be confronted by these cases, as well as identify a focused agenda for future commentary, inquiry, and action.
Pro Se Litigants: Application Of A Single Objective Standard Under Frcp 11 To Reduce Frivolous Litigation, Brian L. Holtzclaw
Pro Se Litigants: Application Of A Single Objective Standard Under Frcp 11 To Reduce Frivolous Litigation, Brian L. Holtzclaw
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment addresses the application of Rule 11 sanctions to pro se litigants and argues that based on the language of Rule 11, the concerns expressed in the Advisory Committee Note to Rule 11, and the primary goal of Rule 11 to deter abusive pleadings, a single objective standard should be applied to all parties-attorneys, represented parties, and pro se litigants-to determine whether Rule 11 has been violated. Under this single objective standard, a pro se litigant's lack of legal representation should be considered only in determining the severity of the sanction, not in determining whether Rule 11 has been …
Bias In The Washington Courts: A Call For Reform, Melisa D. Evangelos
Bias In The Washington Courts: A Call For Reform, Melisa D. Evangelos
Seattle University Law Review
Because of the documented threat that racial and gender bias pose to the effective administration of justice in Washington, this Comment advocates amending the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct to explicitly make intentional gender and racial bias an act of attorney misconduct and to discipline any attorney who engages in such behavior. Section I of this Comment identifies and describes instances of attorney behavior that result in gender and racial bias and explains the impact of such bias on attorneys, clients, and the judicial system. Section II explores similar anti-bias rules proposed or in place in other states. Section III …
The Right To Health Care In The United States, Ken Wing
The Right To Health Care In The United States, Ken Wing
Faculty Articles
This article provides an analysis of the history of constitutional interpretation in the United States, and reveals that any right Americans have to health care is a political rather than constitutional right.
Abortion And The Pied Piper Of Compromise, Annette E. Clark
Abortion And The Pied Piper Of Compromise, Annette E. Clark
Faculty Articles
In this article, Professor Clark offers a detailed analysis of the controversy among legal scholars which has long surrounded the issue of legal regulation of abortion. Professor Clark begins by focusing on a recent book by Professor Laurence Tribe, Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes. She argues that although Tribe claims to seek a compromise solution to the abortion problem, he fails in this pursuit both because he does not truly search for compromise and because he is unwilling to explore intermediate moral or legal positions that are not acceptable to either the pro-choice or pro-life movements. In contrast, Professor Clark …
Re-Imagining Childhood And Reconstructing The Legal Order: The Case For Abolishing The Juvenile Court, Janet Ainsworth
Re-Imagining Childhood And Reconstructing The Legal Order: The Case For Abolishing The Juvenile Court, Janet Ainsworth
Faculty Articles
Although the institution of the juvenile court developed rather recently in our legal system, it is now quite firmly established: every American state and nearly every industrialized nation has a juvenile court system in place. The juvenile court is not without its critics, however. In this Article, Professor Janet Ainsworth recommends its complete abolition. Professor Ainsworth contends that society's current view of the nature of adolescence no longer comports with the turn-of-the century view that originally informed the development of an autonomous juvenile court, thus undermining the ideological legitimacy of a separate court system for juveniles. In addition, Professor Ainsworth …
Testimonial Consistency: The Hobgoblin Of The Federal False Declaration Statute, Sidney Delong
Testimonial Consistency: The Hobgoblin Of The Federal False Declaration Statute, Sidney Delong
Faculty Articles
This article focuses on the inconsistent statement provision of the Federal False Declaration Statute. Part I of this article identifies certain anomalous aspects of perjury that make it particularly difficult to control by threats of punishment. Perjury's resemblance to an innocent mistake creates a risk that criminal sanctions will be misapplied. These sanctions may have counterproductive effects, at times inducing people to commit perjury and at others inhibiting people from correcting inaccurate testimony that they have previously given. Part II demonstrates the way in which the conflict between the goals of deterrence and mitigation is manifested in the federal perjury …
Washington's Partial Veto Power: Judicial Construction Of Article Iii, Section 12, Heidi A. Irvin
Washington's Partial Veto Power: Judicial Construction Of Article Iii, Section 12, Heidi A. Irvin
Seattle University Law Review
This Note recommends that the separate subject test employed by Washington courts in reviewing the constitutional validity of partial vetoes be abandoned like the affirmative-negative test before it. In the alternative, the Constitution should be amended to remove any perceived need for a subjective judicial test. As a last-choice solution to the problem of uncertainty and inefficiency in the legislative process, the legislature should use its override powers more extensively.
Communication In The Ninth Circuit: A Concern For Collegiality, Stephen L. Wasby
Communication In The Ninth Circuit: A Concern For Collegiality, Stephen L. Wasby
Seattle University Law Review
After a discussion of the court's basic organization, the general stages of consideration of a case will be briefly described. Then attention will be focused on communication between the judges about cases. Cases before screening panels will be discussed first. Then cases set for argument before three-judge panels will be examined beginning with pre-argument communication, extending through exchanges at argument, the postargument conference, and the post-conference period. This will be followed by discussion of communication leading to the call for an en banc court. Communication among judges chosen for an en banc court will be considered next along with intracircuit …
Appellate Review Of Unclear State Law In The Ninth Circuit After In Re Mclinn, Daniel L. Brewster
Appellate Review Of Unclear State Law In The Ninth Circuit After In Re Mclinn, Daniel L. Brewster
Seattle University Law Review
In McLinn, the Ninth Circuit significantly departed from the practice of the other circuits, and from its own prior practice, when it rejected the deferential standard of review normally applied to a federal district court's interpretation of state law. This Note discusses the Ninth Circuit's decision in McLinn and examines the deferential standard employed in the other circuits and in the United States Supreme Court. The Note takes the position that McLinn was correct in rejecting the former practice of accepting a district court's interpretations of state law unless clearly wrong, but that McLinn went too far in holding …
"Phoenix Rising" And Federalism Analysis, David Skover
"Phoenix Rising" And Federalism Analysis, David Skover
Faculty Articles
The reaction to the Supreme Court's ruling in Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority leaves the decided impression that Garcia is a case of some importance, a milestone in the evolution of the constitutional doctrine of federalism. Whether Garcia will mark a radical shift in the jurisprudence of federalism, with major practical ramifications in the balance of federal and state economic regulatory powers, or whether the case is destined for a quick and unceremonious overruling is a question of some moment. This article evaluates the probable significance of Garcia for the development of the constitutional doctrine of federalism.
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 …
Legislative History In Washington, Arthur C. Wang
Legislative History In Washington, Arthur C. Wang
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment begins with an examination of court usage of Washington State legislative history and illustrates the lack of consistent judicial standards for acceptance of evidence of legislative intent. It then describes a systematic process that lawyers may use to identify and obtain relevant legislative history in Washington, and at the same time, points out defects in the record-keeping system. It concludes with recommendations to the Washington State Legislature to improve the accessibility and usefulness of state legislative history. Adoption of these recommendations would not only aid the legal researcher, but also provide the legislature with a better means to …
The Perils Of Judicial Statesmanship, James E. Bond
The Perils Of Judicial Statesmanship, James E. Bond
Faculty Articles
This article addresses the issue of what is fit for a Supreme Court Justice to do and whether the Court is acting within its constitutional authority. The United States is a democratic republic in which power flows from the people to elected representatives who remain answerable to the people. By contrast, the Justices sit for life and answer to no one. The Court is thus a profoundly antidemocratic institution. When and how the Court ought to exercise its anti-democratic authority is the only enduring important question in American constitutional law.
Court Rulemaking In Washington, Hugh Spitzer
Court Rulemaking In Washington, Hugh Spitzer
Seattle University Law Review
This article suggests that Washington court rule controversies arise from the lack of a clear, constitutionally established apportionment of rulemaking powers between the legislative and judicial branches, and that there is a lack of procedures providing adequate internal safeguards and accountability. This article first reviews the classical separation of powers doctrine. The discussion then focuses on internal procedural safeguards that also serve within each power center to discourage arbitrary or ill-considered action. This article then reviews the history of court rulemaking in Washington and in other jurisdictions and suggests that from a logical view, the scope of sole judicial power …
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 Brethren-Woodward & Armstrong, James E. Bond
The Brethren-Woodward & Armstrong, James E. Bond
Faculty Articles
James E. Bond reviews Woodward & Armstrong’s The Brethren.
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 …
Book Review: H. Fingarette & A. Fingarette Hasse, Mental Disabilities And Criminal Responsibilities, John Q. La Fond
Book Review: H. Fingarette & A. Fingarette Hasse, Mental Disabilities And Criminal Responsibilities, John Q. La Fond
Seattle University Law Review
Whether mental illness and related impairments in the human psyche should affect an individual's criminal responsibilityfor law-breaking behavior has always provoked intense andwide-ranging debate. This debate clearly reflects society's lack of consensus concerning the appropriateness and scope of considering mental impairment in assessing individual criminal responsiblility. Thus, it is not unexpected that recently proposals to abolish the insanity defense have been seriously suggested or that noted scholars have urged society to place the disposition of mentally ill offenders in the exclusive hands of experts. That this heated discussion continues unabated should come as no surprise, since legal doctrines which excuse …
The Unconstitutionality Of Limitations Upon Donations To Political Committees In The 1976 Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments, David Skover
Faculty Articles
The Supreme Court's decision in Buckley v. Valeo partially dismantled the electoral reform program formulated in the 1974 Amendments to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. The Court declared that the Act's limitations on expenditures by candidates and independent expenditures in federal elections unconstitutionally burdened political speech and association, while it upheld restrictions on contributions to candidates. After five months of deliberation, Congress attempted to salvage its design for electoral reform by enacting the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1976. Responding to Buckley's approval of restrictions on political contributions, Congress imposed new limits on "contributions" to political committees. …
Prior Inconsistent Statements: Presently Inconsistent Doctrine, Mark Reutlinger
Prior Inconsistent Statements: Presently Inconsistent Doctrine, Mark Reutlinger
Faculty Articles
The common law has come a long way since Sir Walter Raleigh was convicted of treason on the basis of accusations contained in unproduced letters and the hearsay declarations of unproduced witnesses. However, despite the painstaking development and innumerable formulations and reformulations of the hearsay rule over the past several centuries, there are areas of that body of law which are as yet unsettled and the subject of heated controversy. One such area is that of prior inconsistent statements of witnesses, the controversy over which has continued over the years and has surfaced once again with promulgation of the new …
Policy, Privacy, And Prerogatives: A Critical Examination Of The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence As They Affect Marital Privilege, Mark Reutlinger
Policy, Privacy, And Prerogatives: A Critical Examination Of The Proposed Federal Rules Of Evidence As They Affect Marital Privilege, Mark Reutlinger
Faculty Articles
This article examines all aspects of proposed federal rules of evidence affecting marital privilege in the United States. It also provides an explanation of the reasons advanced by the Advisory Committee for abolition of martial and other state-created privileges; Common law origins of marital privilege.
Mental Commitment Cases Of 1971 Supreme Court Term, Ken Wing, R. Carman
Mental Commitment Cases Of 1971 Supreme Court Term, Ken Wing, R. Carman
Faculty Articles
Even in areas where legal representation has become available to the poor through the efforts of Legal Services programs, there is still one group that is almost universally denied representation: those confined under the various forms of civil commitment and patients in mental health institutions. Almost by definition in need of legal counsel and predictably indigent, they are faced with interpersonal and institutional barriers that further reduce their chances to obtain representation. It is the position of the National Health Law Program that Legal Services programs throughout the country should focus some of their attention towards this portion of their …
Victimless Crimes: A Proposal To Free The Courts, Robert C. Boruchowitz
Victimless Crimes: A Proposal To Free The Courts, Robert C. Boruchowitz
Faculty Articles
Victimless "crimes"—acts that are presently outside the law but which have no readily identifiable victim—account for almost half of the cases handled by United States courts. They include behavior which may reflect illness and which requires medical and therapeutic attention (such as drunkenness), as well as behavior condemned as varying from moral or social standards and leading to harmful behavior (such as vagrancy and curfew violations). If the burden of regulating this type of behavior were removed from the criminal justice system, perhaps one half of the courts' current case load could be eliminated. Furthermore, persons caught in deviant conduct …