Search
Filter Search
State v. Nelson
Held that community custody conditions requiring the criminal defendant submit to breath analysis and urinalysis testing to monitor compliance with conditions prohibiting use of alcohol and unprescribed drugs were supported by authority of law, and thus were constitutional under art. 1 sec. 7 of the Washington Constitution, regardless of whether they were related to his specific crimes
Dupuis v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland
Held that a law that revived claims based on sex acts toward minors that were previously time-barred impairs a defendant's vested right to be free from a claim once its statute of limitations has expired, finding that a prohibition on laws reviving expired claims "runs as a theme" throughout the text of Maine's Constitution.
State v. Francisco Edgar Tirado
Held that North Carolina's "cruel or unusual" punishment clause — construed consistently with a separate state constitutional provision specifying the types of punishment laws may impose, without limitations based on age — would provide less protection against life-without-parole sentences for juveniles than the Eighth Amendment, so must be interpreted in lockstep with the federal "cruel and unusual" punishment clause.
What Can States Do to Mitigate the Threat of ICE Arrests in Courthouses?
Wisconsin trial Judge Hannah Dugan’s high‑profile arrest renews focus on the impact of ICE enforcement inside state courthouses.
Cherokee Nation v. U.S. Department of the Interior
Held that the governor possesses constitutional and statutory authority to represent the state’s interests in litigation involving tribal gaming contracts, including to choose the counsel who will represent his position. The governor was a named defendant in his official capacity in the underlying litigation, and the state attorney general sought to assume control of defending the state’s interests over the objection of the governor, who had already employed separate counsel to represent the state.
Taking Offense v. State of California
The California Supreme Court will consider whether a law that makes it a misdemeanor for staff at long-term care facilities to “willfully and repeatedly” fail to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns violates federal and state free speech protections.
Bailey v. McKintosh County, Webster v. McIntosh County, McIntosh County v. Webster
Will consider whether to uphold a lower court order stopping a special election, after early voting had already begun, on a local referendum to repeal zoning changes that would increase permissible house sizes in a historic community of slave descendants. The lower court ruled that a state constitutional provision allowing citizens to petition to repeal or amend county ordinances by referendum does not extend to zoning ordinances.
North Carolina Court Enables a Partisan Shift on State Elections Board
The court approved a law to strip the governor’s election board powers, risking creating a precedent for partisan power-grabbing.
Reuss v. Arizona
Healthcare providers sought to block enforcement of Arizona's 15-week abortion ban on the basis that it violates a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion. On plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the state did not contest, the trial court permanently blocked the ban.
Texas v. Margaret Daley Carpenter
Texas’s attorney general sued a New York doctor for mailing abortion-including drugs to a woman in Texas, claiming she practiced medicine in Texas without a Texas license and improperly aided an abortion. After the doctor did not respond to the complaint, a Texas trial court issued a default judgment enjoining her from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to state residents and imposing $100,000 in civil penalties, as sought by the attorney general.
