Southcenter Joint Venture v. National Democratic Policy Committee
Washington Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceUtter, J.
(concurring in the result)—I agree with the majority that, given the facts of this case, Const, art. 1, § 5 (hereinafter section 5) does not allow the petitioners the right to solicit donations and memberships within a private shopping mall. The majority's rationale for reaching this result, however, is one with which I cannot agree.
*435In applying the interpretive criteria we developed in State v. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d 54, 720 P.2d 808 (1986),48 I find a different basis for our common result. There simply is no compelling reason why we should append a state action requirement to section 5 when the…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Burton v. Wilmington Parking AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Cox v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- United States v. CruikshankSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.