Search
Filter Search
State v. Mumford
Dissent would have held that a K-9 unit's brief entry into the cabin of a vehicle duting a lawful traffic stop constituted an unconstitutional search under both the federal and state search-and-seizure provisions
Jackson v. State
Dissent would have granted defendant's petition to transfer jurisdiction and found that the State had not sufficiently shown the reasonableness of the officer's search of the defendant's locked trunk based only on the smell of burnt marijuana coming from the passenger compartment, as required under the Indiana Constitution's search-and-seizure standard
Jennifer M. Chacón
Jennifer M. Chacón is the Bruce Tyson Mitchell Professor of Law at Stanford Law School.
State Courthouses in the ICE Age
The Trump administration’s actions signal a sea change in immigration enforcement and a broader assault on state and local governments.
O’Neil v. Gianforte
Held that the state constitution’s protection of the public’s “right to know” allows for a limited gubernatorial privilege exception if the governor meets the “high bar of demonstrating that the information is essential to carrying out a constitutional duty and that its disclosure would chill future candor.” Also held that the process for determining whether a particular document otherwise subject to the "right to know" may be shielded by gubernatorial privilege should be the same as for other "candor privileges" (e.g., attorney-client, doctor-patient), including in camera review by the trial court to determine the proper scope. Remanded to the district court to conduct such review with respect to the requested agency documents.
Steven H. Steinglass
Steven H. Steinglass is dean emeritus and professor emeritus at Cleveland State University College of Law. His blog tracks developments of the...
The Ohio Constitution: Its History and Its Future
Recent amendments, and fights against them, demonstrate the importance of the state constitution.
Vet Voice Foundation v. Hobbs
Washington Supreme Court held requirement that election workers verify voter signatures on mail ballots, when coupled with the state’s recently expanded process for notifying voters and providing an opportunity to cure when a signature mismatch is identified, does not facially violate the state constitution’s free and equal elections, privileges and immunities, or due process clause.
Honoring Former Hawaii Justice Masaji Marumoto’s Legacy on the Bench
A look at Marumoto’s trailblazing career, in celebration of May’s Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander (AANHPI) Heritage Month.
McKay v. State
Reversed trial court ruling that a 2023 law that gives the attorney general control over the state’s defense of the imposition of the death penalty on collateral review violates the state constitutional provision governing the duties of district attorneys
