Search
Filter Search
Care and Prevention of Eve
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that department of children and families violated the state constitution's free exercise of religion protection when it vaccinated a child temporarily in its custody over the religious objections of her parents. Parents who have temporarily lost custody of their children retain a residual right to direct their religious upbringing, and the state must demonstrate that allowing the child to remain unvaccinated would substantially hinder the department’s compelling interest in the vaccination.
Hon. Barbara J. Pariente
Hon. Barbara J. Pariente served on the Florida Supreme Court from 1998 to 2019 and was the chief justice from 2004 to 2006.
Judging Democracy: A Former Justice Reflects on Bush v. Gore 25 Years Later
The legal battles over the 2000 presidential election were the beginning of a cautionary tale reminding us that democracy does not sustain itself.
State v. Davieontray Breax
Louisiana Supreme Court held that the state constitution bars prosecutors from joining capital charges with other felony charges in one indictment.
"Liberty" is a Big Word, and That’s OK
A recent abortion rights decision in North Dakota demonstrates that the distinction between “fundamental” and “non-fundamental” rights doesn’t always make sense in state constitutional jurisprudence.
J.F. v. St. Vincent Hospital
Indiana Supreme Court established a new approach to mootness for the state constitutional and statutory right to appeal court-ordered temporary involuntary commitments confining individuals to mental health treatment facilities, holding that expiration of such an order generally will not bar appeal. Expiration will only moot an appeal if the appellee can show the absence of any collateral consequence from the temporary commitment order.
Planned Parenthood v. Urmanski
Wisconsin Supreme Court dismissed Planned Parenthood's action contending that a 175-year old law, if interpreted by the court to ban abortions, violates pregnant people and their physicians' inherent rights to life and liberty and equal protection under the state constitution. The case was dismissed because the court held in Kaul v. Urmanski that the law does not ban abortions.
Differences in Kansas and Missouri Show Importance of Initiative Process
Unlike Kansans, Missouri voters can use ballot initiatives to enact laws and amendments their lawmakers refuse to pass.
Howell v. Cooper; North Carolina Bar and Tavern Association v. Stein
The North Carolina Supreme Court held, in two cases heard together, that bar owners pleaded colorable claims that executive orders shutting down or restricting operation of their businesses violated their right to earn a living.
State v. Adrian Fernandez
The Oregon Supreme Court will consider whether a law that restricts appellate courts’ authority to review a sentence that falls within the range set in guidelines by the state criminal justice commission precludes appellate review of a state constitutional challenge to that sentence. In an amicus brief, the American Civil Liberties Union argues that interpreting the law to preclude such appellate review would violate separation of powers and the state constitution's equality guarantee.
