Authors: Andrew C. Cook, Seth L. Cooper
| State High Court | Judicial Selection Process | Legal Authority |
|---|---|---|
General
Interim Vacancies
|
Latest News
- Washington Supreme Court upholds $35 million campaign finance fine against Meta - AOL.com
- WA’s high court will weigh in on transgender woman’s prison transfer - The Seattle Times
- Supreme Court rules man can’t sue prison officials who cut his dreadlocks - huntingdondailynews.com
- Supreme Court sides with Trump administration in green card case involving returning residents - KWXX - Hawaii
- Trump's power takes center stage in US Supreme Court's home stretch - Reuters
- Supreme Court says Rastafarian can’t sue prison officials over shorn dreadlocks - The Washington Post
- Supreme Court sides with Cisco over Falun Gong in case on Chinese surveillance - The Washington Post
- Q&A: State Supreme Court candidate Miller says appellate experience gives him advantage - The Center Square
- Q&A: Judge Amamilo stresses precedent, trial-court experience in high court bid - The Center Square
- Supreme Court rules that prison guards can't be sued for shaving Rastafarian’s head - NPR
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.


Washington Supreme Court