Search
Filter Search
New York’s First Constitution Was a Reaction to British Rule
The constitution, which served as a model for parts of the U.S. Constitution, adopted many policies of the English legal system.
Manny Marotta
Manny Marotta is a legal and political journalist who has contributed articles to JURIST, The Hill, Business Insider, and other outlets. He is currently a law clerk with Fix the Court, where he...
State Supreme Court Justices and Ethics Investigations
Challenges faced by state judicial ethics bodies show the need for reform.
State v. Hall
Kansas intermediate appellate court held that the state constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" should be applied independently of, and not in lockstep with, the federal Second Amendment. Applying strict scrutiny, the court found a state ban on gun possession by people convicted of certain felonies for a term of years after their release from prison to be narrowly tailored to a compelling interest in ensuring public safety.
Hawaii’s Lawsuit Against Oil Companies Alleges “Harm to Public Trust Resources”
States are suing companies that cause harm to the environment, relying on mandates requiring protection of public resources.
Edwards v. Montana
Montana trial court held that a law — which defines “female,” “male,” and “sex” wherever used in the state code as two binary categories — facially violates the state constitutional right to privacy by interfering with individuals' "ability to make personal and intimate decisions concerning their bodies and psyches." The court also found as-applied state equal protection violations based on sex and cultural discrimination.
Steven D. Schwinn
Steven D. Schwinn is a professor at the University of Illinois Chicago School of Law
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.
State v. Rudy Nino Parras
Oregon Supreme Court granted review to consider whether state "felon in possession" law, as applied to defendants with prior drug felonies, violates state or federal right to bear arms, but after oral argument dismissed review as improvidently allowed.
Connor v. Oklahoma
Reversed a district court’s denial of the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission’s motion to dismiss a discrimination claim brought by the former general counsel of the commission. The commission claimed she failed to comply with the notice provisions of the Governmental Tort Claims Act, but the lower court had found conflicts between that act and state anti-discrimination statutes meant the notice requirements did not apply. The Oklahoma high court, reaffirming that the liability limitations in the act apply to both constitutional torts and statutes, said no irreconcilable conflicts exist.
