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
Efforts to Keep Trump Off 2024 Ballot Move Through State Courts
Courts are considering claims that Trump engaged in an insurrection and is disqualified from running for president under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
Virginia Supreme Court Announces Expansive Interpretation of Religious Liberties Protection
The justices rejected the federal First Amendment standard but differed about what the standard should be and how to discern the original meaning of the state constitutional provision.
Judicial Ethics and Discipline in the States
Before the U.S. Supreme Court adopted of a code of conduct last month, it was the only court in the country without one.
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.
The Stakes in Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Election
The outcome could have big implications for abortion rights, elections, and more.