Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Washington Federation of State Employees v. State

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 31, 1995No. 62082-2Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTalmadge, J.

(concurring in part/dissenting in part) — I concur in the majority’s view that art. II, § 19 of the Washington Constitution applies to initiative measures such as Initiative 134. I write separately to emphasize my concern that this court’s treatment of art. II, § 19 cases has too often been a talismanic recitation of the "rational unity” doctrine without a real discussion of what that doctrine means. This lack of a real standard is frustrating for legislators and the public alike.

I disagree with the majority’s decision on the scope of remand, believing that the court should reverse the trial…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. State v. GrisbyWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Brosnahan v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Fritz v. GortonWashington Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Kueckelhan v. Federal Old Line InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Harbor v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API