Search
Filter Search
Paxton v. Annunciation House
Texas Supreme Court held that a clause empowering the state attorney general to seek judicial forfeiture of corporate charters permits him to bring a quo warranto action to shut down a Catholic charity based on allegations it violated a state law against harboring undocumented immigrants. The state's religious freedom restoration act does not bar the claim from being filed, and the law is neither unconstitutionally vague nor precluded by federal immigration law. Remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings on the merits.
As Executions Rise, A Conversation with an Attorney Whose Clients Are Facing the Death Penalty
John Mills, whose client on Oklahoma’s death row was granted a new trial by the U.S. Supreme Court this term, discusses his anti-death-penalty advocacy.
Stephens v. State
Georgia Supreme Court upheld, under the state’s right to bear arms clause, a law banning individuals younger than 21 from carrying handguns in public, unless they have military training. Declined to import federal Second Amendment standards into Georgia’s clause, noting it distinctly and expressly grants the legislature power to regulate the manner in which firearms may be carried.
State of North Carolina v. Chambers
North Carolina Supreme Court upheld a law that allows a juror to be excused and substituted by an alternate after criminal trial deliberations have begun. Because the law requires the trial court to instruct the jury to begin deliberations anew, the majority said, a verdict will still be reached by the 12 people the state constitutional jury right guarantees, not 13.
Sobel v. Cameron
Three Jewish women claim abortion ban, which defines human life as beginning at fertilization, violates the state constitution’s prohibition on unintelligible laws because its application to in vitro fertilization is unclear, and religious liberties by inhibiting the Jewish duty to procreate and prioritizing Christian values. Trial court granted summary judgment for the state defendants for lack of standing, but Court of Appeals reversed as to one of the plaintiffs who has frozen embryos and has shown an interest in using them but confusion about her options.
Norfolk Southern Railway v. State Corporation Commission
Virginia Supreme Court held that a law permitting broadband service providers to install fiber optic cables across railroad property violates a state constitutional amendment providing robust "public use" requirements for eminent domain, as applied to a private company seeking to expand its network for financial gain.
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.
Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers v. State of Missouri
Asking the court to declare unconstitutional and block enforcement of Missouri’s ban on abortion, its ban on the use of telemedicine for abortion, the 72-hour waiting period for the procedure, and multiple other restrictive abortion-related laws.
City of Wenatchee v. Stearns
Washington Supreme Court upheld the legality, under the state's private affairs clause and the Fourth Amendment, of a police stop that was based on information received in a 911 call. A stop based on a 911 tip is lawful when circumstances indicate the tip is reliable and it contains a factual basis to give the officer reasonable suspicion of a crime, even if how the caller gathered the facts conveyed in the tip is not established.
Isaacson v. Arizona
Healthcare providers seek to block enforcement of remaining abortion restrictions, including an in-person pre-procedure visit requirement, 24-hour waiting period, and telemedicine ban for medication abortions, on the basis that they violate a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion.
