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
Vaccines, Religious Freedom, and Parental Rights
Massachusetts’s supreme court ruled last week that the state violated religious freedom guarantees when it vaccinated a child in its custody over parental objections.
Levels of Scrutiny Applied by State Courts, Explained
The tests state courts use to decide whether a law impermissibly infringes on people’s rights play a big role in determining whether government restrictions on those rights are upheld.
Washington Supreme Court Hears Challenge to Ban on Large-Capacity Magazines
The court must navigate confusing U.S. Supreme Court precedent in evaluating the ban.
A Practical Guide to Using State History to Overcome Federal Precedent
Lawyers often waive state constitutional claims by failing to make arguments that diverge from federal case law. An originalism-style approach may provide alternatives.
What’s at Stake in the 2024 Ohio Supreme Court Elections
The outcome of the races for three seats on the high court could impact Ohio law on abortion, voting rights, gun regulations, and more.
State Court Oral Arguments to Watch for in May
Issues on the dockets include limits on a reform-minded prosecutor, automatic life sentences for late adolescents, and a ban on misgendering LGBTQ+ senior citizens.
Wisconsin Supreme Court Election Spells a Win for Abortion Rights
The new justice, who previously represented Planned Parenthood, joins the bench as the court is set to decide two major abortion cases.
Ohio’s Justice DeWine Attempts to Address Criticisms of Originalism
The Ohio Supreme Court justice outlines a framework that promotes state interpretations that differ from federal jurisprudence.