Search
Filter Search
Alaska Trappers Association v. City of Valdez
Held that a local ordinance regulating animal trappings within city limits was enacted pursuant to the city’s authority to regulate land use and public safety and not substantially irreconcilable with state law
Brown v. Kotek
Held that the terms of the conditional commutation limited the Governor's authority to revoke the commutation to the period before the commutee's sentence had expired
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Hunt
Unanimously denied challenge to the law restoring voting rights to non-incarcerated individuals convicted of felonies, on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked standing
Cosme v. Clark
Ruled that under Indiana's constitutional right to a jury trial, courts cannot weigh conflicting evidence or assess witness credibility at the directed-verdict stage
Usachenok v. Department of the Treasury
Held that the confidentiality directive in regulation applicable to harassment and discrimination investigations in state workplaces was constitutionally overbroad under New Jersey's affirmative right to speak freely, which is broader than federal First Amendment Protections
Walter v. State
Dissent would have held that the imposition of monetary sanctions against the indigent defendant and the denial of his right to file further applications in forma pauperis violated equal access
State v. Penna
Dissent would have held that the criminal suspect was required to be reminded of his Miranda rights to validly waive a prior invocation, reading Florida's constitutional right against self-incrimination more expansively than its federal counterpart
Lucas v. Ashcroft
Ruled that the fiscal note summary printed on every ballot cast for a constitutional amendment authorizing increase in minimum funding of city police force was inaccurate and misleading
Roderick M. Hills Jr.
Roderick M. Hills Jr. is the William T. Comfort, III Professor of Law at New York University
Choice of Law in an Era of Abortion Conflict
When a citizen of an anti-abortion state travels to another state to receive the procedure, which state’s law should apply?
