Search
Filter Search
The Next Round of Partisan Gerrymandering Fights
An unprecedented cycle of mid-decade redistricting highlights a state-by-state legal patchwork, with significant national implications.
League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa v. Pate
Iowa Supreme Court held organization did not have standing to seek to dissolve an injunction entered in a separate case that barred the secretary of state from providing voter registration forms in languages other than English, by claiming such materials fall within an exception to the state law underlying the injunction. The law generally requires all "official documents" to be in English but exempts "language usage required by or necessary to secure" state constitutional or federal law rights. According to the court, an organization's expenditure of resources in response to a law that does not violate or regulate its rights, status, or legal relations is not a legally cognizable injury.
Erin Van Campen
Erin Van Campen is a Research & Training Attorney at the Neighborhood Defender Service of Detroit, where she provides on-call assistance and training to public defenders and appointed counsel...
Maya Menlo
Maya Menlo is an Assistant Defender at the Michigan State Appellate Defender Office, where she represents children and adults on appeal from juvenile court and criminal court proceedings.
Cathren Cohen
Cathren Cohen is a staff attorney with UCLA Law’s Center on Reproductive Health, Law, and Policy.
The Power of State Reproductive Freedom Amendments
A new report analyzes the language and effects of recently adopted amendments protecting reproductive rights and highlights their potential for abortion access and beyond.
State v. Rudy Nino Parras
Oregon Supreme Court granted review to consider whether state "felon in possession" law, as applied to defendants with prior drug felonies, violates state or federal right to bear arms, but after oral argument dismissed review as improvidently allowed.
Evers v. Marklein
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that statutes permitting a legislative committee to pause, object to, or suspend administrative rules for varying periods of time both before and after promulgation — used by the committee in this case effectively to block for three years a rule banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ patients — facially violate the state constitution’s bicameralism and presentment requirements.
Connor v. Oklahoma
Reversed a district court’s denial of the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission’s motion to dismiss a discrimination claim brought by the former general counsel of the commission. The commission claimed she failed to comply with the notice provisions of the Governmental Tort Claims Act, but the lower court had found conflicts between that act and state anti-discrimination statutes meant the notice requirements did not apply. The Oklahoma high court, reaffirming that the liability limitations in the act apply to both constitutional torts and statutes, said no irreconcilable conflicts exist.
