Search
Filter Search
The Arizona Constitution: Deeply Skeptical of Power
Arizona’s governing document is easy to amend. While Arizonans have approved changes on issues like abortion and immigration, they use the right relatively sparingly.
Gotay v. Creen
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a “special relationship” exists between foster children and the state that imposes an affirmative duty on the state to ensure a reasonably safe foster home environment, but found the state defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on the parent and guardian's substantive due process claim.
Texas v. Margaret Daley Carpenter
Texas’s attorney general sued a New York doctor for mailing abortion-including drugs to a woman in Texas, claiming she practiced medicine in Texas without a Texas license and improperly aided an abortion. After the doctor did not respond to the complaint, a Texas trial court issued a default judgment enjoining her from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to state residents and imposing $100,000 in civil penalties, as sought by the attorney general.
LeMieux v. Evers
The Wisconsin Supreme Court held, in a divided decision, that the governor did not exceed his partial veto authority under the state constitution when he altered digits, words, and punctuation in a budget bill to extend a school funding increase from 2 to 402 years.
State Court Oral Arguments to Watch for in September
Issues on the dockets include charter schools, minimum wage for live-in caregivers, online arbitration agreements, and a controversial handwritten date requirement for mail ballots.
Reuss v. Arizona
Healthcare providers sought to block enforcement of Arizona's 15-week abortion ban on the basis that it violates a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion. On plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the state did not contest, the trial court permanently blocked the ban.
The Power of State Constitutional Rights
Judges, practitioners, and scholars explore critical issues facing state courts and constitutions.
Firearms Owners Against Crime v. Commissioner of Pennsylvania State Police
Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that statute providing for "instantaneous" background checks of prospective gun purchasers requires provision of eligibility determinations as quickly as possible with the resources the agency has available, but found to be waived -- and declined to reach -- state constitutional claims that failing to provide immediate results violates purchasers' and sellers' inherent rights and right to bear arms.
State v. Nelson
Held that community custody conditions requiring the criminal defendant submit to breath analysis and urinalysis testing to monitor compliance with conditions prohibiting use of alcohol and unprescribed drugs were supported by authority of law, and thus were constitutional under art. 1 sec. 7 of the Washington Constitution, regardless of whether they were related to his specific crimes
Cuomo v. New York State Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government
New York Court of Appeals held that state ethics commission does not violate separation of powers principles.
