Search
Filter Search
Harrison Stark
Harrison Stark is Senior Counsel, Director of Special Projects at the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School.
Resuscitating State Damages Remedies Against Federal Officials
There are forceful legal arguments that individuals can use state civil rights statutes to sue federal employees who violate the U.S. Constitution.
State v. Amble
Iowa Supreme Court revisited its 2021 decision in State v. Wright that the state's search and seizure clause requires police to obtain a warrant before searching garbage placed curbside for collection, finding that subsequent enactment of a state statute providing such garbage "shall be deemed abandoned property" means a warrant is no longer constitutionally required. The majority reasoned that Wright relied on "positive law" -- a local anti-scavening ordinance prohibiting anyone but licensed trash collectors from picking up trash -- to define private property rights, and the state statute changed that positive law by preempting the local ordinance. A dissent opined that the majority's position allows legislative "end-runs" of constitutional rights and disregards an overarching reasonable-expectation-of-privacy analysis.
Center for Arizona Policy v. Arizona Secretary of State
Arizona Supreme Court will consider allegations that a campaign-disclosure law violates state constitutional rights to free speech and not to be disturbed in "private affairs," as well as separation of powers. Lower courts dismissed the claims.
Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections
Pennsylvania Supreme Court will consider whether it violates the state constitution's "free and equal" elections clause not to count a mail ballot because the voter failed to comply with a state law requiring the date to be handwritten on the ballot's outer envelope.
Josh Kaul v. Wisconsin State Legislature
Wisconsin Supreme Court held a law giving a legislative committee authority to approve or disprove civil settlements reached by the state justice department violates separation of powers as applied to civil enforcement actions and civil cases brought on behalf of executive agencies. Settling these types of actions is within the core power of the executive branch, as the legislature has failed to demonstrate that doing so implicates an institutional interest giving lawmakers a shared constitutional role.
Case Trends: State Courts Are Battlegrounds for Transgender and Reproductive Rights
State courts are leaning on their unique state constitutional provisions, departing from federal precedent, and deciding who can challenge restrictive laws.
A Win for Georgia's Gullah Geechee
The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that an island community descended from enslaved people could move forward with a referendum to overturn zoning changes that they argue will price them out of their homes.
Commonwealth v. Shivers
Pennsylvania Supreme Court will consider whether a person fleeing from officers in a high-crime area, standing alone, can create reasonable suspicion to make a police stop lawful under the state constitution's search and seizure clause.
Hilo Bay Marina v. State of Hawaii
Hawaii Supreme Court held the state constitution’s provision against state establishment of religion prevents the state from enforcing a deed restriction requiring property to be used “for Church purposes only.”
