Search
Filter Search
State v. Adrian Fernandez
The Oregon Supreme Court will consider whether a law that restricts appellate courts’ authority to review a sentence that falls within the range set in guidelines by the state criminal justice commission precludes appellate review of a state constitutional challenge to that sentence. In an amicus brief, the American Civil Liberties Union argues that interpreting the law to preclude such appellate review would violate separation of powers and the state constitution's equality guarantee.
Stary v. Ethridge
Texas Supreme Court held that due process requires a heightened evidentiary standard to support a protective order prohibitng contact between a parent and child for longer than two years, likening such an order to a government's termination of parental rights. Instead of the ordinary civil preponderance of the evidence standard, a court must find the statutory requirements for such an order by clear and convincing evidence and must consider the best interests of the child.
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. South Carolina (Planned Parenthood 2)
South Carolina Supreme Court held that a "fetal heartbeat" — as defined in a state law banning most abortions at the point such a heartbeat is detected — occurs when electrical impulses are first detectable as a "sound" with diagnostic medical technology and a medical professional observes those electrical impulses as a "steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart." Although declining to define that point in terms of a number of weeks, the court said that biologically identifiable moment "occurs in most instances at approximately six weeks of pregnancy." The court also held that the law is not unconstitutionally vague.
Wyoming Supreme Court Signals Openness to Limiting Excessive Punishments
At oral arguments over the constitutionality of mandatory life-without-parole sentences for young adults, several justices suggested the right to be free from “cruel or unusual” punishments might be fundamental.
State Constitutional Challenges to Laws Defining Sex
A Montana court decision shows how state protections for privacy and against discrimination may invalidate laws defining sex as binary.
State Department of Education & Early Development v. Alexander
Held that statutes permitting local school districts to operate correspondence study programs as alternative to traditional schooling and authorizing allotments of public funds to purchase nonsectarian educational services and materials did not facially violate state constitutional prohibition on using public funds for the direct benefit of religious or private educational institutions
State v. Cohee
Held that the state was entitled to a writ of prohibition to effectively compel a lower court judge to impose a recidivist life sentence, finding that the state’s pursuit of such a sentence did not violate equal protection and the imposition of such sentence for fleeing from a law enforcement officer with reckless indifference would not violate proportionality clause of state constitution
Fremin v. Boyd Racing, LLC
Ruled that statutory amendments that incorporated historical horse racing as a form of authorized pari-mutuel wagering on horse racing without requiring prior local voter approval were unconstitutional under Article XII, section 6(C) of the Louisiana Constitution
Welch v. United Medical Healthwest-New Orleans
Held that the Louisiana Health Emergency Powers Act's (LHEPA) immunity provision did not violate state constitution's access to courts and adequate remedy provision, due process provisions, nor its prohibition of special laws
Happel v. Board of Education
Held that the law of the land clause of the North Carolina Constitution protects both a parent's right to control her child's upbringing and the right to bodily integrity
