Search
Filter Search
Charles Gardner Geyh
Charles Gardner Geyh is a distinguished professor and John F. Kimberling Chair in Law at the Indiana University Maurer School of Law.
Arizona Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on Territorial-Era Abortion Ban
The state is trying to reinstate a law that was enacted when women could not vote.
Patricia A. Rossi
Patricia A. Rossi is the copresident of the League of Women’s Voters of Connecticut and a volunteer with Planned Parenthood of...
What Is ‘Punishment’? How State Courts Can Fix a Destructive Flaw In Eighth Amendment Case Law
Courts should consider prison conditions and collateral consequences — not just prison time — when reviewing whether punishment is excessive under state constitutions.
Texas and the Next Generation of Abortion Fights
Kate Cox sought an emergency abortion after learning her fetus has a fatal genetic condition. Her case illustrates an emerging set of battles to define the scope of legal exceptions to strict state abortion bans.
State Courts Diverge on Allowing Civil Claims for Child Sexual Abuse Outside Statute of Limitations
Due process challenges by schools and churches to laws reviving civil child sexual abuse claims are pending before the North Carolina and Kentucky supreme courts.
New Mexico Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on New Anti-Abortion Tactic
GOP-controlled cities and counties in pro-choice New Mexico are relying on a long-dormant federal law to outlaw abortion — in contradiction of state law.
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.
Florida Supreme Court Rules Marsy’s Law Does Not Bar Release of Police Names After Shootings
The court said that a broad reading of the victims’ rights amendment would be at odds with other parts of the Florida Constitution.
State Courts Should Reject Federal Precedent When Interpreting State Contract Clauses
Only one state has interpreted its contract clause differently than the federal counterpart — representing a failure on the part of advocates and judges who believe in state constitutional independence.
