Search
Filter Search
In re L.E.S.
Will consider whether a "would have been married" test created by an intermediate appellate court to determine whether a woman, who had children with a same-sex partner at a time when the state's same-sex marriage ban was in effect, has parental rights over the children, violates separation of powers principles and the state constitution's ban on retrocative laws by effectively rewriting state statutes that do not recognize common-law marriage and define parenthood in the case of artificial insemination.
Smith v. BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee
Held that an insurance company’s termination of an at-will employee for petitioning legislators about Covid-19 vaccine requirements did not fall within a “violates clear public policy” exception to at-will employment. Because the right to petition in the TN Constitution only constrains the government, not private parties, a private employer does not violate “public policy” by terminating an employee for exercising that right.
State Court Oral Arguments to Watch for in April
Issues on the dockets include parental rights under now-defunct same-sex marriage bans, New York City’s emissions caps for big buildings, and more.
Sanctuary Policies in a Federal System
States and localities that restrict federal enforcement of immigration and gun laws promote diversity and help protect against authoritarianism.
Dupuis v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland
Held that a law that revived claims based on sex acts toward minors that were previously time-barred impairs a defendant's vested right to be free from a claim once its statute of limitations has expired, finding that a prohibition on laws reviving expired claims "runs as a theme" throughout the text of Maine's Constitution.
State v. Francisco Edgar Tirado
Held that North Carolina's "cruel or unusual" punishment clause — construed consistently with a separate state constitutional provision specifying the types of punishment laws may impose, without limitations based on age — would provide less protection against life-without-parole sentences for juveniles than the Eighth Amendment, so must be interpreted in lockstep with the federal "cruel and unusual" punishment clause.
Montanans Against Irresponsible Densification v. State
Reversed lower court's preliminary injunction against state laws requiring municipalities to allow multi-unit dwellings in single-family zoned areas, finding that the state constitutional right to acquire and protect property is subject to the state's police power and that the "possibility" of constitutional harm is insufficient to support an injunction.
Cherokee Nation v. U.S. Department of the Interior
Held that the governor possesses constitutional and statutory authority to represent the state’s interests in litigation involving tribal gaming contracts, including to choose the counsel who will represent his position. The governor was a named defendant in his official capacity in the underlying litigation, and the state attorney general sought to assume control of defending the state’s interests over the objection of the governor, who had already employed separate counsel to represent the state.
Andrew Willinger
Andrew Willinger is the executive director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law and a lecturing fellow at Duke Law School. He teaches and writes on the...
The Complexity of Lockstepping Post-Bruen
A Kansas court recently refused to follow federal precedent in interpreting the state constitutional right to bear arms.
