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 Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Plummeting Productivity
The state high court will issue fewer than 20 opinions this term — less than a fifth of its average output two decades ago.
Scholarship Roundup: End of Semester Edition
Recent articles address states taking policy questions away from courts, standing in election cases, and state shadow dockets.
One Simple Way to Support State Constitutionalism
A symposium grapples with practical barriers to state constitutional development.
A Conversation with Justice Goodwin H. Liu of the California Supreme Court
Liu spoke about how judicial decisions affect citizens, the state’s system of direct democracy, and the importance of educating law students about state courts.
The Major Questions Doctrine in Michigan
A Michigan appellate court declined to apply the major questions doctrine for now but left open the possibility of its future adoption.
Arizona Highlights Risk of “Zombie” Laws
The U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs ruling has breathed new life into long-unenforced abortion laws.
A Conversation with Former Texas Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson
Jefferson spoke about judicial independence, the under-funding of courts, and the need for greater access to counsel.
Will Voters Have the Final Say on Abortion Rights in Florida?
Lawmakers could undermine reproductive rights even if voters enshrine abortion protections into the state constitution.