Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Courts (218)
- Jurisprudence (214)
- Constitutional Law (210)
- Law and Society (209)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (203)
-
- Jurisdiction (203)
- State and Local Government Law (203)
- Legal History (202)
- Legal Profession (202)
- Supreme Court of the United States (202)
- Legal Education (200)
- Legislation (200)
- Law and Politics (199)
- Rule of Law (199)
- Other Law (198)
- Criminal Law (197)
- Law and Race (197)
- Legal Biography (196)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (196)
- Criminal Procedure (195)
- Evidence (195)
- Civil Procedure (194)
- Common Law (194)
- Law and Economics (193)
- Law and Gender (193)
- Legal Remedies (193)
- Litigation (192)
- Civil Law (191)
- Keyword
-
- Law (12)
- Seattle University Law Review (10)
- Washington (10)
- SFFA (7)
- Affirmative Action (6)
-
- Constitution (6)
- Diversity (6)
- ESG (6)
- Supreme Court (6)
- Black Law Student Association (5)
- Black Law Students (5)
- Black Laywers (5)
- First Amendment (5)
- Privacy (5)
- Seattle University (5)
- Securities and exchange commission (5)
- Symposium (5)
- Addiction (4)
- Artificial intelligence (4)
- Criminal Justice (4)
- Federalism (4)
- Public health (4)
- Regulation (4)
- SEC (4)
- Technology (4)
- Article III (3)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Corporate (3)
- Corporate Governance (3)
- Corporate Law (3)
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 211 - 240 of 241
Full-Text Articles in Judges
If It (Ain’T) Broke, Don’T Fix It: Twombly, Iqbal, Rule 84, And The Forms, Justin Olson
If It (Ain’T) Broke, Don’T Fix It: Twombly, Iqbal, Rule 84, And The Forms, Justin Olson
Seattle University Law Review
The past decade has not been kind to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the Rules). From the growth of summary judgment as a mechanism to let judges instead of juries determine facts, to the love–hate relationship with class actions, judicial interpretations of the Rules have revealed a trend toward complicating the ability of plaintiffs to find redress for their claims. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the shifting standards of pleading requirements under Rule 8. Much has been written by academics and practitioners alike regarding the ripples caused by Twombly and Iqbal. Although the Court would like to …
"Home Rule" Vs. "Dillon's Rule" For Washington Cities, Hugh Spitzer
"Home Rule" Vs. "Dillon's Rule" For Washington Cities, Hugh Spitzer
Seattle University Law Review
This Article focuses on the tension between the late-nineteenth century “Dillon’s Rule” limiting city powers, and the “home rule” approach that gained traction in the early and mid-twentieth century. Washington’s constitution allows cities to exercise all the police powers possessed by the state government, so long as local regulations do not conflict with general laws. The constitution also vests charter cities with control over their form of government. But all city powers are subject to “general laws” adopted by the legislature. Further, judicial rulings on city powers to provide public services have fluctuated, ranging from decisions citing the “Dillon’s Rule” …
Mitigating Foul Blows, Mary Bowman
Mitigating Foul Blows, Mary Bowman
Faculty Articles
For nearly eighty years, courts have offered stirring rhetoric about how prosecutors must not strike foul blows in pursuit of convictions. Yet while appellate courts are often quick to condemn prosecutorial trial misconduct, they rarely provide any meaningful remedy. Instead, courts routinely affirm convictions, relying on defense counsel's failure to object or concluding that the misconduct was merely harmless error. Jerome Frank summed up the consequences of this dichotomy best when he noted that the courts' attitude of helpless piety in prosecutorial misconduct cases breeds a deplorably cynical attitude toward the judiciary. Cognitive bias research illuminates the reasons for, and …
The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer
The Confusing Standards For Discretionary Review In Washington And A Proposed Framework For Clarity, Judge Stephen Dwyer
Seattle University Law Review
It has now been more than thirty-five years since the Washington Rules of Appellate Procedure (RAP) became effective in 1976 and replaced all prior rules governing appellate procedure. One significant change that those rules made was to clearly describe and delineate a procedural mechanism for seeking interlocutory review of trial court decisions. The ultimate effect on practitioners is both obvious and unavoidable. Many lawyers, rather than stake out a clear position regarding the applicability of the various considerations governing discretionary review, simply argue that any and every consideration that is even arguably applicable is satisfied by the trial court’s determination. …
Order For The Courts: Reforming The Nollan/Dolan Threshold Inquiry For Exactions, Winfield B. Martin
Order For The Courts: Reforming The Nollan/Dolan Threshold Inquiry For Exactions, Winfield B. Martin
Seattle University Law Review
For decades prior to 2005, Fifth Amendment regulatory takings jurisprudence languished in a state of confused neglect. Rather than articulating a clearly discernable standard for determining whether a violation of the Takings Clause had occurred, Justices rebuffed government action that seemed to amount to “an out-and-out plan of extortion” and nodded in approval when they deemed the government to have “acted diligently and in good faith” or in furtherance of a “compelling interest.” In trying to parse this imprecise thicket, scholars have characterized the Court’s approach to regulatory takings as a “muddle,” in “disarray,” and “incoherent.” Professor Kent even noted …
Actual Versus Perceived Performance Of Judges, Theodore Eisenberg, Talia Fisher, Issi Rosen-Zvi
Actual Versus Perceived Performance Of Judges, Theodore Eisenberg, Talia Fisher, Issi Rosen-Zvi
Seattle University Law Review
Perceptions of judges ought to be based on their performance. Yet, few studies of the relation between perceived and actual judicial performance exist. Those claiming judicial bias should be especially sensitive to the relation between perception and performance. Judges perceived by the public or by the legal community as disfavoring a group may be regarded as biased, but that perception is unfair if the judges’ votes in cases do not disfavor the group. For example, it may be unfair to accuse an appellate judge of pro-state bias in criminal cases if the judge votes for defendants at a higher rate …
Dead Wrong: Why Washington’S Deadly Weapon Criminal Sentencing Enhancement Needs “Enhancement”, James Harlan Corning
Dead Wrong: Why Washington’S Deadly Weapon Criminal Sentencing Enhancement Needs “Enhancement”, James Harlan Corning
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment confronts the difficult question of how to reformulate the deadly weapon sentencing enhancement to better align it with the policy goals of deterring and punishing armed crime. Part II explores the constitutional and practical defects in each of the three formulations of the sentencing enhancement’s armed requirement by delving into the enhancement’s legislative history and the judicial struggle to interpret it. Part III analyzes the need for a more nuanced approach to the weapon enhancement by exploring key criticisms about the enhancement’s scope and application. Part IV argues that the Washington legislature must provide courts with more rigid …
Preliminary Report On Race And Washington's Criminal Justice System, Task Force On Race And The Criminal Justice System
Preliminary Report On Race And Washington's Criminal Justice System, Task Force On Race And The Criminal Justice System
Seattle University Law Review
For this Report, the Research Working Group reviewed evidence on disproportionality in Washington’s criminal justice system and considered whether crime commission rates accounted for this disproportionality. We found that crime commission rates by race and ethnicity are largely unknown and perhaps unknowable, but that some researchers simply take arrest rates as good proxies for underlying commission rates for all crimes.We found that use of arrest rates likely overstates black crime commission rates for several reasons.68 But even if arrest rates are used as a proxy for underlying crime commission rates, the extent of racial disproportionality is not explained by commission …
Law Clerks Gone Wild, Parker B. Potter, Jr.
Law Clerks Gone Wild, Parker B. Potter, Jr.
Seattle University Law Review
This Article grows out of my delight in seeing fellow law clerks break through the paper curtain and onto the pages of the Federal Reporter, the Federal Supplement, or some other compendium of judicial opinions. While my fascination with law clerks as the subjects rather than the instruments of judicial writing is probably not universal, I have selected the opinions I discuss in this Article with an eye toward entertaining—and maybe even instructing, if only slightly—the clerkigentsia and the judiciary. So, with that audience in mind, I set off in search of law clerks who had gone wild …
The Challenges For Directors In Piloting Through State And Federal Standards In The Maelstrom Of Risk Management, Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey
The Challenges For Directors In Piloting Through State And Federal Standards In The Maelstrom Of Risk Management, Chief Justice E. Norman Veasey
Seattle University Law Review
In the 2010 Berle Center Directors’ Academy Keynote Address, Chief Justice Veasey addresses “the federal and state contexts relating to the corporate-governance focus on business risk and the expectations laid at the doorstep of directors and officers of U.S. public companies.” Specifically, Chief Justice Veasey looks “at the governance landscape through both a federal regulatory lens and a state judicial lens as it relates to risk assessment and risk management.”
Moral Foundation Theory And The Law, Colin Prince
Moral Foundation Theory And The Law, Colin Prince
Seattle University Law Review
Moral foundation theory argues that there are five basic moral foundations: (1) harm/care, (2) fairness/reciprocity, (3) ingroup/loyalty, (4) authority/respect, and (5) purity/sanctity. These five foundations comprise the building blocks of morality, regardless of the culture. In other words, while every society constructs its own morality, it is the varying weights that each society allots to these five universal foundations that create the variety. Haidt likens moral foundation theory to an “audio equalizer,” with each culture adjusting the sliders differently. The researchers, however, were not content to simply categorize moral foundations—they have tied the foundations to political leanings. And it is …
A Call For Judicial Scrutiny: How Increased Judicial Discretion Has Led To Disparity And Unpredictability In Federal Sentencings For Child Pornography, Loren Rigsby
Seattle University Law Review
The United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) has made child pornography related crimes among the most harshly punishable federal offenses. Nevertheless, sentencing judges have regained the right to depart from the recommended Federal Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guideline range for child pornography reflects sound and clear congressional intent to impose harsh penalties on defendants to deter, and ultimately eliminate, the market for child pornography. For this reason, this Comment argues that sentences that fall outside the Guidelines range should be reviewed with much greater scrutiny and should not be used solely to reflect a judge’s view that the advised sentence is …
Butchering Statutes: The Postville Raid And The Misinterpretation Of Federal Criminal Law, Peter R. Moyers
Butchering Statutes: The Postville Raid And The Misinterpretation Of Federal Criminal Law, Peter R. Moyers
Seattle University Law Review
This article argues that a federal district court misinterpreted several statutes after an immigration raid in Postville, Iowa. In Part II, I begin with an account of Agriprocessors' prior legal troubles, which explains how it became such a politically attractive target. Next, I describe how the investigation of Agriprocessors led to a raid seeking to execute nearly 700 criminal arrest warrants. In Part III, I describe the causes of the accelerated criminal process that resulted in nearly 300 guilty pleas and sentencings in the span of twelve days. In Part IV, I argue that the accelerated process was premised upon …
Reluctant Judicial Factfinding: When Minimalism And Judicial Modesty Go Too Far, Scott A. Moss
Reluctant Judicial Factfinding: When Minimalism And Judicial Modesty Go Too Far, Scott A. Moss
Seattle University Law Review
Whatever the merits of minimalism in constitutional adjudication, this Essay argues that in another aspect of federal adjudication--what this Essay terms “reluctant judicial factfinding”--we already have too much minimalism. In certain areas of law, courts are quite reluctant to engage in close scrutiny of critically important facts, instead falling back on policies that avoid such factfinding. Parts II, III, and IV discuss each of these three areas of reluctant judicial factfinding. Then, Part V offers some thoughts as to possible causes of this reluctance to undertake factual inquiries that statutes, rules, and Supreme Court precedent instruct district and appellate courts …
A Limited Defense Of (At Least Some Of) The Umpire Analogy, Michael P. Allen
A Limited Defense Of (At Least Some Of) The Umpire Analogy, Michael P. Allen
Seattle University Law Review
This Essay provides at least a limited defense of some parts of the umpire analogy and ultimately suggests that this analogy may tell us something important about the more general role of courts in the United States. This Essay proceeds in four parts. Part II explores in more depth what those making the umpire analogy appear to mean. At its heart, the analogy principally has been used to address the substantive decision making of judges. This Part will explain that there is more to the analogy than such a narrow decisional focus suggests. Part III builds on Part II. It …
Asymmetric World Jurisprudence, Caprice L. Roberts
Asymmetric World Jurisprudence, Caprice L. Roberts
Seattle University Law Review
This article argues that the Supreme Court should reconsider its prudential justiciability doctrines and their underlying assumptions. As a global theory, this Article offers a judicial dynamism model. It then articulates the relevance of the political question doctrine and the need to view the doctrine as prudential rather than constitutional. First, I discuss the Supreme Court's increased use of judicial minimalism and the political question doctrine to avoid important cases and reduce its docket. Second, I describe my model, in which the court takes a dynamic approach to such issues, dependent upon the political climate, to maintain its appropriate stature …
Aedpa, Saucier, And The Stronger Case For Rights-First Constitutional Adjudication, Stephen I. Vladeck
Aedpa, Saucier, And The Stronger Case For Rights-First Constitutional Adjudication, Stephen I. Vladeck
Seattle University Law Review
This Essay suggests that many of the same reasons why Saucier proved so controversial--and perhaps even unworkable--in qualified immunity cases are less salient in the context of post-conviction habeas corpus, where the value of reaching potentially unnecessary questions of constitutional law far outweighs the cost. Put another way, my thesis is that, even though the Saucier sequence is no longer mandatory in qualified immunity jurisprudence, such a rigid methodological order of battle would be of great utility in the context of post-conviction habeas corpus--and in the adjudication of “new” rules of criminal law more generally. In that context, this Essay …
Revisiting Erie, Guaranty Trust, And Gasperini: The Role Of Jewish Social History In Fashioning Modern American Federalism, Daniel R. Gordon
Revisiting Erie, Guaranty Trust, And Gasperini: The Role Of Jewish Social History In Fashioning Modern American Federalism, Daniel R. Gordon
Seattle University Law Review
This article explores the connection between traditional Jewish localism and the creation of modern American federalism that flows from the Erie doctrine. First, the riddle of Gasperiniis explored. Next, the federalist philosophies of Justices Brandeis and Frankfurter in Erie and Guaranty Trust are discussed. Finally, the article analyzes how Justices Brandeis, Frankfurter, and Ginsburg, as twentieth century American Jews, embody the traditional Jewish minority experience that, at least in part, was informed by anti-Semitism.
Clarence Thomas The First Ten Years: Looking For Consistency, Mark Niles
Clarence Thomas The First Ten Years: Looking For Consistency, Mark Niles
Faculty Articles
Dean Niles describes his observation and impression of the first ten years of Clarence Thomas’ judgeship. While Dean Niles admits that his own views are more liberal than Clarence Thomas’, he was not initially concerned about those differences. But as the days, weeks and years passed, notwithstanding Dean Niles’ early stoicism, serious concerns about the candidate, and later the Justice, began to arise. These concerns were not based on Justice Thomas' beliefs or ideology, but on a growing set of inconsistencies that began to arise between some of his beliefs and actions. With all due respect to a man who …
Understanding The Limits Of Power: Judicial Restraint In General Jurisdiction Court Systems, Justice Philip A. Talmadge
Understanding The Limits Of Power: Judicial Restraint In General Jurisdiction Court Systems, Justice Philip A. Talmadge
Seattle University Law Review
This Article draws on my legislative and judicial background to focus both on the tendency of the courts to exceed their core constitutional role and the implications of such judicial activism. This article contend that modern courts of general jurisdiction are too often embroiled in sociopolitical controversies best left to the political branches of government. Part I addresses the concept of judicial restraint in our constitutional system and the need to define the core powers of the judicial branch of government. Part II discusses principles of judicial restraint in the federal courts. Part III, using the example of Washington State …
Who's Afraid Of Humpty Dumpty: Deconstructionist References In Judicial Opinions, Madeleine Plasencia
Who's Afraid Of Humpty Dumpty: Deconstructionist References In Judicial Opinions, Madeleine Plasencia
Seattle University Law Review
The question of why judges are concerned with justifying or defending their decisions from the followers of Derrida?, is posed in this Article both generally, as a matter of legal interpretation, and specifically, within the context of the issue(s) presented in the examined cases. By examining the concerns articulated by the judges in these cases and then referring back to the writings of Derrida, this Article describes the likely outcome if Derrida's views of (legal) interpretation are in fact applied in judicial opinion-making. In Parts II and III, this Article introduces the reader to important concepts in Derridean deconstruction. These …
Doubting Thomas: Confirmation Veracity Meets Performance Reality, Joyce A. Baugh, Christopher E. Smith
Doubting Thomas: Confirmation Veracity Meets Performance Reality, Joyce A. Baugh, Christopher E. Smith
Seattle University Law Review
At the close of the United States Supreme Court's 1994 term, Justice Clarence Thomas became the center of news media attention for his important role as a prominent member of the Court's resurgent conservative bloc. More frequently than in past terms, Thomas's opinions articulated the conservative position for his fellow Justices. According to one report, "The newly energized Thomas has shown little hesitancy this term in leading the conservative charge. Another article referred to Thomas's "full-throated emergence as a distinctive and articulate judicial voice." Thomas's new prominence, assertiveness, and visibility have been attributed to his emergence from the shadows of …
Freedom Of Religion & Religious Minorities In Pakistan: A Study Of Judicial Practice, Tayyab Mahmud
Freedom Of Religion & Religious Minorities In Pakistan: A Study Of Judicial Practice, Tayyab Mahmud
Faculty Articles
This article explores the practice of the superior judiciary of Pakistan as it relates to freedom of religion and rights of religious minorities. Pakistan's successive constitutions, which guarantee fundamental rights and provide for separation of powers and judicial review, contemplate judicial protection against unlawful executive and legislative actions. The record of Pakistan's judiciary about protection of the rights of religious minorities is uneven and has gone through three phases. The first phase is remarkable for unequivocal protection of freedom of religion and religious minorities. The second phase contracted this protection through undue deference to the legislature. In the last phase …
Toward Meaningful Judicial Elections: A Case For Reform Of Canon 7, Michele Radosevich
Toward Meaningful Judicial Elections: A Case For Reform Of Canon 7, Michele Radosevich
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment argues that elections can give us good judges who are both accountable to the voters and able to decide cases impartially. To accomplish this, we must, in the words of one local media commentator, “take off the muzzle and allow judges to discuss issues.” But before one can propose change, one should understand the present system and the purposes it was designed to serve. Part II of this Comment examines Canon 7 of the Washington Code of Judicial Conduct and the balance it strikes between accountability and impartiality. Part III explores how the Canon has been interpreted in …
Praetorianism & Common Law In Post-Colonial Settings: Judicial Responses To Constitutional Breakdowns In Pakistan, Tayyab Mahmud
Praetorianism & Common Law In Post-Colonial Settings: Judicial Responses To Constitutional Breakdowns In Pakistan, Tayyab Mahmud
Faculty Articles
The successive constitutional crises that confronted the Pakistani courts were not of their own making. But the doctrinally inconsistent, judicially inappropriate, and politically timid responses fashioned by these courts ultimately undermined constitutional governance. When confronted with the question of the validity and scope of extra constitutional power, the courts vacillated between Hans Kelsen's theory of revolutionary validity, Hugo Grotius's theory of implied mandate, and an expansive construction of the doctrine of state necessity. A more principled and realistic response would have been to declare the validity of extra constitutional regimes a nonjusticiable political question. Besides ensuring doctrinal consistency, a refusal …
An Empirical Examination Of Motions On The Merits, Thomas B. Marvell
An Empirical Examination Of Motions On The Merits, Thomas B. Marvell
Seattle University Law Review
This Article evaluates the Motions on the Merits procedure. Section II outlines the history of commissioners in this country. Section III describes Washington Court of Appeals Division III: its caseload trends, procedures in ordinary appeals, the commissioners' duties, and the MMT history and current procedures. Section IV quantitatively evaluates MMT procedures, exploring their impact on volume of cases decided, delay, backlog, and reversal rates. Section V presents the attorneys' opinions of the MMTs, and Section VI summarizes the results.
Book Review: A Political Scientist Examines The Washington Supreme Court A Century Of Judging By Charles H. Sheldon, Deborah Dowd
Book Review: A Political Scientist Examines The Washington Supreme Court A Century Of Judging By Charles H. Sheldon, Deborah Dowd
Seattle University Law Review
Charles H. Sheldon asks two major questions in his recent book, A Century of Judging. In answering these questions, Sheldon focuses on the Washington Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the information gathered and analyzed is of more interest to political scientists or historians than to practicing lawyers. Lawyers should be knowledgeable about the judges before whom they may argue a case. Yet, the methodology and data utilized in A Century of Judging do not create a cohesive picture of the supreme court justices, either collectively or individually. The book compiles useful information; however, the answers to the two questions posed and …
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 …
In The Beginning: The Washington Supreme Court A Century Ago, Charles H. Sheldon, Michael Stohr-Gillmore
In The Beginning: The Washington Supreme Court A Century Ago, Charles H. Sheldon, Michael Stohr-Gillmore
Seattle University Law Review
This Article will discuss (1) the politics that influenced the drafting of the judicial article (article IV) in the constitutional convention; (2) the election of the first five members of the bench and the backgrounds of those inaugural judges; (3) the particular approach toward judicial review adopted by these five jurists (activism-restraint); and (4) the personal relations among these members of the supreme court. This Article will provide a personal perspective of the first five judges and their court.
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 …