9873 research outputs found
Sort by
Who Counts as a Reasonable Employee ? The Third Circuit\u27s Bungling of Section 8(a)(1) Violations
No full textThe National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects private employees’ right to unionize and collectively bargain with their employers. Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees employees the right to self-organize labor unions, while section 8 outlines numerous unfair labor practices. Specifically, section 8(a)(1) bans employer interference, coercion, or restraint of any section 7 rights. In a 2022 case, FDRLST Media v. NLRB, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) finding that FDRLST Media’s executive officer’s tweet constituted a section 8(a)(1) violation. This Comment examines the history of section 8(a)(1) violations, specifically discussing the widely adopted objective employee test. An analysis of the NLRA’s purpose, as well as the long adjudicatory history of section 8(a)(1) violations, makes clear that an objective test is the preferred method of the NLRB and every circuit court. This Comment next explores how the Third Circuit subtly shifted the standard in FDRLST Media, focusing on subjective factors that led it to reverse the NLRB. This Comment concludes by arguing that the Third Circuit’s decision is contrary to precedent and practicably unworkable
Why Medicaid Is Addressing Homelessness with Section 1115 Waivers: A Critical Examination of the United States\u27 Federalist Mental Health System
Full text linkHousing and health care are deeply interconnected, and their systemic relationship profoundly affects individual and societal well-being. Inadequate funding has undermined the American mental health system for decades, leading to gaps in care that have caused lasting harm to vulnerable individuals and society as a whole. This Comment examines the historical connections between homelessness and the American mental health system. It explores the benefits and criticisms of the United States’ federalist approach to health care, particularly focusing on Medicaid and its “section 1115 waivers,” which grant states flexibility to develop innovative, state-specific Medicaid programs. Recently, states began to utilize section 1115 waivers to provide housing-related services to vulnerable populations, including individuals with serious mental illness and substance use disorders. Washington pioneered this approach in 2018 when it launched “Apple Health and Homes,” a section 1115 waiver program that provides housing-related services through Medicaid. Drawing on this context, this Comment critiques the state-led approach and advocates for a more equitable and efficient federalized model—one that treats housing stability as a fundamental component of mental health care
The New Redlining: How Progressive Policies Restrict the Development of Housing Supply and Perpetuate America\u27s Racist Property Law Past
Full text linkRecent scholarship has exposed America’s racist property law past. During the twentieth century, decades of deliberate state-sponsored discrimination (a.k.a., “Redlining”) made homeownership—and the accumulation of wealth—more difficult for people of color. In 1948, the Supreme Court outlawed these practices in the seminal case, Shelly v. Kraemer. However, the damage had been done, and has proven to be long-lasting. Redlining slowed economic mobility for people of color and exacerbated the racial wealth gap. As a result, America is in the midst of an affordable housing crisis that disproportionately impacts people of color.Readers well versed in economics and public policy know that the solution to this crisis is relatively simple: build as much housing as possible, as fast as possible. However, local governments have failed to heed this common-sense remedy to boost supply. Restrictive zoning rules—like single-family zoning—limit neighborhood density. Meanwhile, development fees and regulatory delays disincentivize new construction, and skew development that does occur towards luxury projects. Indeed, some of these laws and regulations are passed by well-intentioned progressives seeking to “stick it” to capitalistic developers. However, by hindering development, these policies only serve to exacerbate the affordable housing crisis and perpetuate the racial wealth gap. As such, these policies must be called out for what they really are: the “New Redlining.”This article unapologetically advocates for the abolition of the New Redlining. Local governments must eliminate the laws and regulations that hinder the development of adequate housing supply. However, from a pragmatic perspective, this article also recognizes that—given the desires of local officials to retain control—the implementation of the necessary reforms will need to occur at the local level. Therefore, instead of prescribing broad pieces of preemptive legislation, this article advocates for an innovative approach: the adoption of permitting processes and appeals systems that prevent cities from unduly rejecting or delaying affordable housing development (i.e., housing appeals statutes). In effect, make the New Redlining far more difficult for cities to get away with
U.S. Physicians Knowledge About the Americans with Disabilities Act and Accommodation of Patients with Disability
No full textConstitutional Futurisms
Full text linkHow do we reckon with the past? The Supreme Court’s recent embrace of originalism as a mode of constitutional analysis relies almost exclusively on a view of history and tradition that would bind us to an understanding of principles and ideals that legitimized the exclusion of minority voices. Cases such as New York State Pistol and Rifle Ass\u27n v. Bruen use flavors of originalism as a framework to define rights and governmental powers through their historical antecedents, but this broad standard of interpretation is notably absent in the Court’s recent discussions of histories and traditions of racism in the United States. In Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, the Court instead relies on an ahistorical framing of equal protection as colorblindness. This selective history ignores both the social context of cases such as Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education, and the conceptual origins of affirmative action itself. This results in a vision of a colorblind present and future that is silently constrained and controlled by racisms of the past. Building on Professor Bennett Capers’s work on Afrofuturism and Professor Paul Gowder’s Constitutional Sankofa, I advance a new, futurist methodology of constitutional interpretation—one that incorporates a plurality of histories and traditions, and imagines alternative futures of race and the law
Criminal Caselaw Notebook 2025
Full text linkThis publication from King County Superior Court judge Ronald Kessler is updated semi-annually and is distributed free of charge. It includes citations to Washington state case law on a variety of criminal law topics.https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wash-books/1002/thumbnail.jp
Evidence: A Problem-Based and Comparative Approach, Fifth Edition
No full textThis casebook provides a comprehensive, problem-based approach to studying the rules of evidence. Organized around the federal rules, this casebook provides coverage of every single rule.
Key features of the casebook include approximately 120 in-depth problems that are designed to teach all the nuances of the rules, as well as coverage of selected state rules of evidence that differ significantly from the federal rules, in order to facilitate class discussion about the policies underlying the rules of evidence.https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/faculty-books/1096/thumbnail.jp
By the Rules: Techniques for Writing Persuasive Rules
No full textWhether you’re drafting an advocacy letter or brief to the court, it should be obvious from reading the legal rule sections which side you represent. Drafting persuasive legal rules, like all writing conventions, can be done well by minding some basic patterns. While no one formula exists for good advocacy, these techniques can help you frame persuasive rules in a way that favors your client’s position
