Search
Filter Search
State v. Hall
Kansas intermediate appellate court held that the state constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" should be applied independently of, and not in lockstep with, the federal Second Amendment. Applying strict scrutiny, the court found a state ban on gun possession by people convicted of certain felonies for a term of years after their release from prison to be narrowly tailored to a compelling interest in ensuring public safety.
Edwards v. Montana
Montana trial court held that a law — which defines “female,” “male,” and “sex” wherever used in the state code as two binary categories — facially violates the state constitutional right to privacy by interfering with individuals' "ability to make personal and intimate decisions concerning their bodies and psyches." The court also found as-applied state equal protection violations based on sex and cultural discrimination.
Members of the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana v. Planned Parenthood Great Northwest
Indiana Supreme Court held that the right to privacy does not protect the right to abortion except when necessary to protect the patient’s life or to protect a patient from a serious health risk. The court left open the possibility of an as-applied challenge to the state's ban, which is being pursued on remand.
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.
Pennsylvania’s Radical Constitution: An Experiment in the Making
From an early embrace of popular sovereignty to current voting decisions that make national news, Pennsylvania’s constitution has long reached beyond the state itself.
Everything You Need to Know About Next Month’s High-Stakes Supreme Court Elections in Pennsylvania
Three justices will face an up or down vote in November, the outcome of which is likely to impact the midterms.
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.
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.
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.
State v. Gonzalez
Held that defendant's mental health could not be considered in determining whether sentence was unconstitutionally disproportionate
