Talk:2024 Washington Attorney General election

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by KimberlyAnd (talk | contribs) at 00:48, 24 September 2024 (Undid revision 1247369642 by BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:48, 24 September 2024 by KimberlyAnd (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 1247369642 by BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Washington

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Abortion question

@KimberlyAnd @BottleOfChocolateMilk Is the current phrasing I proposed on the abortion passage acceptable for both of you, or do you have any comments? Trying to resolve this without edit warring. ATM I think you've both violated the 3-revert rule, but I don't want to drag this into ANEW unless it becomes necessary. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 16:57, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

The current phrasing is good, it supports what the sources say. I was planning to make a similar edit later on but you beat me to it. SlackingViceroy (talk) 17:03, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I think Bottle's version was more-or-less correct, but the "would not uphold unconstitutional laws" phrasing was unclear: it requires the context that he was referring to Washington's state constitution (which includes abortion protections).

My only question is whether "personally opposes" is clear, because it doesn't distinguish between Serrano meaning it as "I think it's wrong but should be legal" or "I think it should be illegal but that won't affect how I enforce Washington's laws." (I'm not sure which one Serrano himself meant.) – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:12, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

The sources do seem to suggest a bit of both (but probably more of the former). However, I believe the current phrasing is good as is, otherwise we are in danger of doing original research. SlackingViceroy (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I think "would not uphold unconstitutional laws" is more in general and specifically related to gun-control legislations. I think he made it clear that he believes abortion legislations are constitutional. KimberlyAnd (talk) 17:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion of past jobs

Same here: I don't want this to turn into a second edit war.

Right now, my impression is that Serrano's work with a conservative legal foundation is important enough to be included, but Brown working at a law firm wouldn't be, unless there's something that makes that law firm notable. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Pacifica Law Group is his current full time position and is intrinsically tied to the AG's office's legal strategy in the state. It is very relevant. KimberlyAnd (talk) 17:33, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

What's the point of mentioning their individual law firms? Why not just say they're lawyers? BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:18, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Their organizations are very relevant to Washington's and the AG's history. Unless the information is inaccurate, please do not undo or delete accurate and relevant information. KimberlyAnd (talk) 00:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Categories: