Search
Filter Search
How the Constitution Constrains Presidential Overreach Against the States
Existing “anti-commandeering” doctrine is one avenue to challenge abuses of presidential power, but stronger arguments are rooted in the Constitution’s separation of powers.
Atlantic Games, Inc. v. Georgia Lottery Corporation
Concurral to denial of certiorari by Justice Peteerson questioned whether the court should reconsider existing caselaw on the nondelegation doctrine in a different case because, in their view, it does not comport with original public meaning
People v. Eads
Michigan Court of Appeals held that a 50-year minimum sentence for a defendant convicted of second-degree murder as a juvenile is "cruel or unusual" punishment, finding that sentence constitutionally equivalent to the life-with-the-possibility-of-parole sentence the Michigan Supreme Court found "cruel or unusual" in People v. Stovall. The court also held that the defendant's sentence was disproportionate given the sentencing court's failure to consider his youth and its attendant characteristics as mitigating factors.
People v. Hagestedt
Concurrence would have declined to lockstep with the United States constitution and engaged in an independent analysis of the Illinois constitutional provision
Amdor v. Grisham
Denied portion of original petition alleging that governor's executive orders declaring or addressing gun violence and drug abuse as public health emergencies pursuant to the state's Public Health Emergency Response Act violate either the scope of that law or separation of powers. But granted petition to extent it challenged part of the orders suspending a juvenile detention program for exceeding the limits of the state's police power.
Donaldson v. City of El Reno
Held that the retroactive appliation of amendment to the Sex Offenders Registration Act, which placed certain residency requirements on sex offenders, was not punitive and therefore did not violate the ex post facto clause of the Oklahoma Constitution
Heos v. City of East Lansing
Held that new franchise fee charged to in-city consumers by utility provider and remitted to the city was an unlawful tax that violated the Headlee Amendment of the Michigan Constitution, which requires voter approval for new taxes
Griffin v. State Board of Elections
A candidate for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court, who lost by over 700 votes, claims that the state board of elections followed an incorrect process for registering voters and seeks to invalidate more than 60,000 votes.
Three Years After Dobbs, State Courts Are Defining the Future of Abortion
Litigation across the states is testing how far constitutional amendments can go in protecting or restricting abortion access.
Adkins v. State
Idaho trial court denied motion to dismiss claim that the state's abortion bans — as applied to pregnant people that have "an emergent medical condition that poses a risk of death or risk to their health (including their fertility)" — violate the state constitution's "inalienable rights" clause, finding that the Idaho Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in Planned Parenthood Great Northwest v. State that the bans were not facially invalid in all applications did not preclude this as-applied challenge.
