Authors: Andrew C. Cook, Seth L. Cooper
State High Court | Judicial Selection Process | Legal Authority |
---|---|---|
General
Interim Vacancies
|
Latest News
- Opinion | Supreme Court Q&A: Washington Post columnists answer your questions - The Washington Post
- FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington - Colorado Springs Gazette
- Gun owners sue D.C., demanding to carry firearms on Metro - The Washington Post
- Supreme Court lets vaccine mandate stand without religious exemption - The Washington Post
- Florida judge to block law that would ban abortions after 15 weeks - The Washington Post
- More than 180 arrested at abortion rights protest near Supreme Court - The Washington Post
- Leaders in Washington state react to the Supreme Court's EPA ruling - FOX 13 Seattle
- Impact of Black Woman on the Supreme Court - NBC4 Washington
- Supreme Court Protesters Arrested En Masse - The Intercept
- Miss. lawmaker says 12-year-old incest victims should carry pregnancies to term - The Washington Post
Scholarship & White Papers
-
Washington Supreme Court Position 6: A Debate
Pugent Sound Lawyers Chapter, 28 September 2010 – Event Audio/Video
Featuring: Richard B. Sanders, Charlie Wiggins, Peter Callaghan, David K. DeWolf, Stewart Jay
Media & Commentary
-
Washington Supreme Court Rules on Attorney General’s Discretion to Enter Litigation in Two Landmark Cases
The Washington Supreme Court in September issued two of its most highly-anticipated rulings in recent years. Continuing public controversy over federal health care law and the attorney general’s authority to join the states in a multi-state lawsuit challenging the law provided the backdrop to City of Seattle v. McKenna.1 The exercise of the eminent domain power and the attorney general’s discretion in representing state agencies is at issue inGoldmark v. McKenna.2 The pair of rulings addresses the Washington attorney general’s powers under the constitution and laws of Washington State—although opinions written by justices of the court raise their own questions about whether the scope of the attorney general’s powers were addressed consistently.
-
Washington Supreme Court Upholds School Funding Structure: Disparities in School Employee Pay Not Unconstitutional
On November 12, 2009, the Washington State Supreme Court unanimously declined to declare as unconstitutional the state’s educational funding structure.1 The case asked whether the state legislature is constitutionally compelled to equalize state allocations to school districts for school employee salaries.