Image
Judicial Interpretation
In considering state constitutional questions, judges may apply an array of methodologies, including originalism and other uses of history, textualism, purposivism, comparativism (including studying other state courts), and common law or precedent.
State constitutions also raise unique interpretation questions. For example, one common issue is whether a state constitutional provision should be interpreted in “lockstep” with the federal constitution.
Filters
The Major Questions Doctrine in the States
State courts should hesitate before adopting the federal major questions doctrine under state law.
Judicial Advisory Opinions Explained
State and federal courts differ not just in the substantive rights they recognize but also in how they define judicial power.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Election Could Shape Direction of State Law
The candidates for an open seat on Pennsylvania’s supreme court have very different approaches to legal interpretation.
North Dakota Budget Bill Struck Down as Violation of ‘Single Subject’ Constitutional Rule
The state supreme court relied on a seldom-used state constitutional provision to upend a long-standing state legislative practice.
Judicial Deference to Agency Expertise in the States
As the U.S. Supreme Court reconsiders Chevron deference, almost all state courts continue to recognize the importance of agencies’ expertise in policymaking.
The Contentious History Behind New York City’s Right to Shelter
New York State’s high court has yet to define the scope of the right to shelter, which comes from a Depression-era amendment to the state constitution.
The Stakes in Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Election
The outcome could have big implications for abortion rights, elections, and more.
State Courts Have Their Own Shadow Dockets
Expedited judicial rulings may not always be problematic in the state context.