Search
Filter Search
People v. Jennings
Will consider what standard Michigan courts should adopt to determine whether prosecutorial misconduct bars retrial under the state’s double jeopardy clause. The defendant argues that the federal constitutional standard--which requires proof that a prosecutor specifically intended to cause a mistrial--inadequately protects the principles of double jeopardy and insufficiently deters egregious conduct, so an objective standard should apply under the Michigan Constitution.
The Lawsuits to Expel Texas’s Democratic Lawmakers Lack Any Support
The governor and attorney general’s claims that the state supreme court should expel lawmakers who fled the state to stop the legislature from gerrymandering congressional districts are unsubstantiated and contradictory.
New Jersey’s Constitution Allowed Women to Vote in the 1700s
Though the right was short-lived, it’s an example of how states can expand — and contract — voting rights.
Maryjane Johnson
Maryjane Johnson is a program associate in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.
State Justices Continue to Challenge Originalism
A lively debate about the value of “history and tradition” in analyzing cases is ongoing in state courts. Some justices are pushing for alternative interpretative methodologies.
Krasner v. Ward
Held that articles of impeachment brought by the Pennsylvania legislature against District Attorney of Philadelphia County Larry Krasner became null and void upon the expiration in November 2022 of that legislative session.
Nicole Ozer
It’s Time to Revitalize California’s Constitutional Right to Privacy
Recently filed cases challenging AI surveillance provide an opportunity for California courts to properly apply the state’s privacy right.
Arizona Right to Life v. Fontes
Held that the ballot description for an abortion-rights amendment initiative was sufficiently accurate and was not required to explain the initiative's potential impact on existing abortion laws.
