Authors: Andrew C. Cook, Seth L. Cooper
State High Court | Judicial Selection Process | Legal Authority |
---|---|---|
General
Interim Vacancies
|
Latest News
- Supreme Court to hear hotel accessibility testing case Wednesday - The Washington Post
- Hunter Biden returns to court in Delaware and is expected to plead not guilty to gun charges - NBC4 Washington
- Analysis | Young Climate Activists Say 'We'll See You in Court' - The Washington Post
- Inslee didn't abuse power with pandemic eviction moratorium ... - wenatcheeworld.com
- Supreme Court to hear appeal over expert testimony in Yuma drug ... - Cronkite News
- Former federal judge rips Washington Post over 14th Amendment editorial - The Hill
- Leading abortion rights legal group hires Covington's Brinkmann - Reuters
- The Biden interview: The President talks about the Supreme Court ... - The Philadelphia Inquirer
- What to watch in the Supreme Court’s next term - PBS NewsHour
- The Supreme Court starts its new term with dismal approval ratings - ABC News
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.