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.
Assurecare Adult Home v. Bolina
Washington Supreme Court will consider a challenge by residential caregivers to elderly and disabled adults to an exclusion in the state's minimum wage law for live-in caregivers, brought under the state constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause.
J.P. Morgan Chase v. City of Corsicana
Texas Supreme Court will consider whether a state constitutional provision authorizing publicly-funded economic development programs is subject to the state constitution's "gift clauses," restricting grants of public money to private entities.
State v. McFarland
Connecticut Supreme Court held that the state constitution’s due process provisions require a more protective balancing test for pre-arrest delay than the approach adopted by the majority of federal circuits under the federal due process clause.
State v. McLain
Maine Supreme Court held that the state constitution's privilege against self-incrimination provides greater protection than the federal Fifth Amendment with respect to waiving that privilege.
Case Trends: Post-Dobbs and Skrmetti, 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.
Lyon v. Riverside Methodist Hospital
Ohio Court of Appeals held that a law capping noneconomic damages for medical malpractice claims does not facially violate state constitutional due process or equal protection, but did violate those guarantees as applied to the plaintiff whose award was signficantly reduced for extreme injuries.
Mohebali v. Hayes
North Carolina Court of Appeals held that a law capping jury awards of noneconomic damages for medical malpractice did not violate the state constitutional jury trial right of a plaintiff who sued her physician for negligence for allowing her pregnancy to extend to 44-weeks, resulting in fetal death.
