Courts Commons^™

New Judicial Federalism At The Crossroads: Observations Of State Constitutionalism In Rhode Island, Melissa A. Long, Geoffrey H. Cole

Northwestern University Law Review

Jurists nationwide are engaged in robust conversations about state constitutionalism and the degree to which their state constitutions are more protective of individual rights than is the United States Constitution. The Rhode Island Supreme Court, like several state supreme courts, largely adheres to the minimum standards of protection that the United States Supreme Court establishes under the federal constitution when interpreting analogous provisions under the state constitution; that is, it follows a lockstep approach with the United States Supreme Court’s interpretation of individual rights guaranteed by the federal constitution that are also protected under the Rhode Island Constitution.

Proponents of …

Geduldig's Footnote: Five-Plus Decades Of State Courts Reckoning With Federal Pregnancy Discrimination Doctrine, Martha F. Davis

Northwestern University Law Review

In Geduldig v. Aiello (1974), the U.S. Supreme Court held that pregnancy discrimination does not constitute sex discrimination. The decision’s constitutional logic has recently been applied in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and United States v. Skrmetti. Yet over five decades, state courts have overwhelmingly rejected Geduldig’s rationale—both in construing state employment discrimination statutes and in interpreting state constitutional equality provisions. Courts in at least sixteen states have rejected Geduldig’s rationale in construing state employment discrimination laws, while only four states have followed it. Of the ten states with Equal Rights Amendments that have addressed whether …

State Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosure Laws And The Dormant Commerce Clause: Leveraging The State Interest In Protecting Residents From Deception To Pass The Pike Balancing Test, Matthew Macphail

Northwestern University Law Review

Misleading corporate claims about greenhouse gas emissions pose a high risk of consumer deception, as there is currently no uniform federal standard governing how companies must measure or disclose those emissions. Without a national regulatory scheme, firms can selectively report, use inconsistent methodologies, or market vague “carbon neutral” claims, making it difficult for consumers to assess accuracy or compare companies’ representations.

In 2023, California introduced legislation requiring companies doing business in the state to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to bring transparency to this area. But such state-level mandates face a constitutional obstacle: the Dormant Commerce Clause, …

Textual (In)Difference In State Search-And-Seizure Provisions, Quinn Yeargain

Northwestern University Law Review

Over the past 250 years, state constitutional drafters have refined the scope of rights and liberties protected by their constitutions’ texts. Today, all state constitutions include a search-and-seizure provision—and though only a minority follow the layout, text, and context of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, most of them bear a striking resemblance to it. However, textual variations abound. Some of them may seem minor, like using the word “possessions” instead of “effects,” or mandating that warrants describe their intended targets “as nearly as may be” instead of requiring that they “particularly describ[e]” them. But others, like the addition …

The New Economic Liberties, Daniel B. Rodriguez

Northwestern University Law Review

Despite the lack of serious interrogation at the federal constitutional level of economic regulations, there continues to be a fairly robust, energetic attention at the level of state constitutional law to so-called economic liberties. In a number of key cases, including, for example, matters involving occupational licensing, state courts have looked to unique features of their respective state constitutions to assess whether and to what extent regulations undertaken under the police power go too far. The rationales for evaluating and, in some cases, invalidating regulations under economic liberties principles are creative, and also controversial. The development of new interpretive approaches …

Child Labor And State Constitutionalism, Andrew Hammond, Helen Hershkoff

Northwestern University Law Review

Almost ninety years after Congress banned “oppressive” child labor as part of the Fair Labor Standards Act, employers are pushing state legislatures to let them put children to work in dangerous poultry plants, at hazardous construction sites, and during late shifts on school nights. Perversely, calls to rollback federal protections are camouflaged in the rhetoric of parents’ rights, casting child labor regulation as intrusive, paternalistic, and even socialist—echoing the same corporate arguments used a century ago when the Child Labor Amendment to the U.S. Constitution went down in defeat. These arguments mask the desperate economic circumstances of a parent claiming …

Court Reform And State Constitutions, Bryna Godar, Miriam Seifter

Northwestern University Law Review

State legislatures regularly propose and enact laws that seek to shape the substantive outcomes of state courts. These maneuvers, including court-packing, jurisdiction-stripping, and more creative changes to judicial selection or authority, would amount to legal earthquakes at the federal level. At the state level, these efforts often receive virtually no attention.

This Essay brings the potent category of outcome-shaping state court reform measures into focus and evaluates it as a question of state constitutional law. We argue that state constitutions, organized around principles of popular sovereignty, do not bar measures that align state courts with popular preferences or the public’s …

State Constitutionalism's Fragile Wall, Adam B. Sopko

Northwestern University Law Review

The adequate and independent state grounds (AISG) doctrine has long demarcated the perimeter of the U.S. Supreme Court’s authority to review state court decisions, limiting review to questions of federal law. AISG maintains the Court’s primacy over federal law and state courts’ supremacy over state law. A comprehensive review of all filings on the Court’s docket from state courts over the last twenty years reveals that recent applications of AISG consist of subtle but significant departures from existing norms that, together, suggest a reformulation of the Court’s power over state courts that threatens their sovereign law development role. This Essay …

State Constitutional Rights And Judicial Power, Zachary D. Clopton

Northwestern University Law Review

On the one hand, we are in a moment when interest in state courts and state constitutional law is growing. Especially, though not exclusively, among those who question the Supreme Court of the United States, there are increasing calls for state supreme courts to rely on state constitutions to expand rights. On the other hand, we are in a moment when interest in reducing the power of the courts is growing. Especially, though not exclusively, among those who question the Supreme Court of the United States, there are increasingly calls for reining in judicial power.

This Essay is not an …

Foreword: Fifty-One Constitutions In An Evolving Federal Order, Misha Bogdanov, Olivia Christ

Northwestern University Law Review

On November 6 and 7, 2025, the Northwestern University Law Review, along with the Brennan Center for Justice and State Court Report, convened for its annual symposium, titled The Power of State Constitutional Rights. The symposium brought together judges, practitioners, and scholars to consider the substantive rights protected by state constitutions, the institutions charged with enforcing them, and the democratic processes through which state constitutional law changes. Across conversations about reproductive freedom, criminal procedure, labor, economic liberty, LGBTQ+ rights, voting, federalism, and judicial design, one proposition repeatedly, and emphatically, came into view: American constitutional law is not exhausted by the …

Uncertainty In Business Judgment: How A Divide Between Delaware's Judiciary And Legislature Has Changed Corporate Law, Andrea Safran

William & Mary Business Law Review

In response to controversial Chancery Court decisions, the Delaware Legislature rushed to amend the Delaware Code in order to reinforce the business judgment rule. As the foremost business court in the nation, every Chancery Court decision is thoroughly scrutinized by the corporate world, so when the court goes against normal business practices, corporations grow wary in their trust of the State. Thus ensues a scramble by the State to pass legislation that will protect corporate interests. With these recent decisions, however, the Chancery Court may have lost its footing, and Delaware could soon see a mass corporate exodus with the …

The Longer-Term Impact Of Civil Justice Reform: A 10-Year Retrospective On Utah Civil Discovery Reform, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Miriam Hamilton

Faculty Publications

In 2021, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) obtained grant funding from State Justice Institute to undertake a retrospective study of the Utah civil justice reforms. The new study replicated some of the analyses from the 2015 study to compare case characteristics and outcomes against the post-implementation data extracted for the 2015 study. In addition to examining the impact on case characteristics and outcomes, an objective of the new study was to examine the impact of the Rule 26 revisions on practitioner behavior, which is less easily captured in case filings. To do so, NCSC convened a project advisory …

Access To Justice As Access To Data, Tanina Rostain

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Keynote Address, delivered in celebration of the launch of SCALES, discusses the importance of making local and state court data available for research on the functioning of the American civil justice system. It describes the regulatory and administrative challenges of obtaining good-quality data from courts. It calls for a concerted effort among researchers and policymakers to develop open-source technologies for the development of case management systems and data infrastructure. And it urges researchers to foster a collaborative research ecosystem based on broadly sharing court data.

Reimagining The Inclusive Jury, Anna Offit

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, everyday life for many Americans was upended. And yet, the jury trial remained viable — even vital. Faced with an era-defining public health disaster, courts innovated, embracing novel technologies and techniques to reimagine where and how justice might be made. But why did it take a pandemic to spur this kind of institutional creativity? Prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, people who were otherwise eligible to participate as jurors were routinely — and uncontroversially — struck or exempted from service due to limited mobility, vision and hearing loss, and caregiving responsibilities. Recent experience …

The Wages Of Hitching Wagons, Thomas B. Bennett

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

This article examines the challenges faced by states that align their constitutions with federal doctrine through the practice of "lockstepping"—adopting federal legal standards into state law. Lockstepping binds states to federal law, regardless of its trajectory. Part I traces the evolution of standing doctrine in both federal courts under Article III and Kentucky courts under its constitution. Part II presents an originalist critique of the federal injury-in-fact requirement, highlighting emerging efforts to abandon this requirement in federal courts. Part III discusses the dilemma states like Kentucky face, balancing constitutional interpretation, federalism, and legal stability.

The Emerging Constitutional Law Of Remote Criminal Justice, Jenia I. Turner

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The COVID-19 pandemic compelled courts to experiment with a novel mode of criminal process: conducting proceedings via video. The remote format helped protect public health during the pandemic, and its convenience has led many states to continue using it in certain circumstances. Yet questions about its desirability and constitutionality have lingered, and many are concerned that it undermines the justice and integrity of criminal proceedings. As the future of remote criminal justice is up for debate, it is important to assess to what degree it complies with fundamental constitutional principles. To that end, this Article offers a comprehensive analysis of …

Against "The Huddleston Test", Dora Klein

Faculty Articles

Many courts—mostly federal, but also some state courts—are misapplying the United States Supreme Court's decision in the 1988 case United States v. Huddleston. These courts have used a single paragraph of dicta from the Huddleston opinion to craft multipart checklist-type "tests" that displace the single requirement of Rule 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence (or corresponding state rules). This displacement risks the admission of other acts evidence without determining whether the evidence is relevant for a non-character purpose by means of inferences that do not involve character. These Huddleston tests thus undermine Rule 404(b)'s prohibition that other acts evidence …

2023 State-Of-The-States Survey Of Jury Improvement Efforts, Paula Hannaford-Agor, Morgan Moffett, Breanna Bell

Faculty Publications

In 2007, the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) published findings from the State-of-the-States Survey of Jury Improvement Efforts (SOS Survey), the first comprehensive snapshot of jury operations and jury trial practices in the United States. The 2007 SOS Survey featured three discrete components: a statewide survey documenting legal infrastructure for juries and jury trials in each state; a local court survey, which documented jury operations at the county-level in state courts; and a judge & lawyer survey, which asked respondents to describe the characteristics and procedures employed in their most recent jury trial.

By the mid-2010s, NCSC began receiving …

Standing For Elections In State Courts, Miriam Seifter, Adam B. Sopko

Publications

Litigation has become a fixture of electoral contests. Litigants today often challenge every step of an election, from the results themselves to picayune aspects of administration. In response to this deluge, some courts have rejected election lawsuits on standing grounds. Such rulings may be unsurprising in federal court, given the tension between the federal standing doctrine's injury requirements and the generalized nature of many election disputes. But most recent election cases take place in state court, where neither Article III nor the premises animating federal standing doctrine apply. State courts need election justiciability theories of their own.

This Article explores …

Brief Of Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellee, Evan J. Criddle

Briefs

No abstract provided.

Thoughts On Law Clerk Diversity And Influence, Todd C. Peppers

Scholarly Articles

It is my great good fortune to have been asked to comment on the remarkable Article Law Clerk Selection and Diversity: Insights from Fifty Sitting Judges of the Federal Courts of Appeals by Judge Jeremy D. Fogel, Professor Mary S. Hoopes, and Justice Goodwin Liu. Drawing on a rich vein of data gathered pursuant to a carefully crafted research design and extensive interviews, the authors provide the most detailed account to date regarding the selection criteria used by federal appeals court judges to select their law clerks. The authors pay special attention to the role that diversity plays in picking …

Lawyerless Law Development, Colleen F. Shanahan, Jessica K. Steinberg, Alyx Mark, Anna E. Carpenter

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

The typical American civil trial court is lawyerless. In response, access to justice reformers have embraced a key intervention: changing the judge’s traditional role. The prevailing vision for judicial role reform calls on trial judges to offer accommodation, information, and process simplification to people without legal representation.

Until now, scholars have known little about judicial behavior in lawyerless courts, including whether and how judges are implementing role reform recommendations. Our lack of knowledge stands in stark contrast to the responsibility civil trial judges bear—and the discretionary power they wield—in dispensing justice for millions of unrepresented people each year. While today’s …

A Uniform Standard For Certifying Questions To State Courts, Bailey D. Barnes

Faculty Publications

Since the mid-twentieth century, federal courts have certified questions of state law to state supreme courts. Rather than speculate on how a state's high court would rule on a given issue, federal courts allow the state court to determine the question itself. In so doing, the federal judiciary promotes comity and consistency while discouraging forum shopping. Yet, federal courts do so at the cost of judicial economy and speedy adjudication of litigants' pending claims.

The United States Court of Appeals is divided into thirteen circuits, of which eleven exercise jurisdiction encompassing states in the Union. Each circuit, as explained in …

Accessing Justice With Zoom: Experiences And Outcomes In Online Civil Courts, Victor D. Quintanilla, Kurt Hugenberg, Ryan Hutchings, Nedim Yel

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The global COVID-19 pandemic brought significant change to our civil justice system, particularly in the rapid shift from in-person to remote court proceedings. Courts across the country, facing the unprecedented challenge of a global health emergency, embraced rapid innovation and the adoption of remote proceeding platforms, such as Zoom and Webex. State courts did so across case types, including within high-volume civil dockets containing evictions, debt collections, small claims, and family law cases, where millions of self-represented and unrepresented litigants encounter the U.S. civil justice system each year. Amid the pandemic, voices converged to encourage these justice innovations, including the …

Election Subversion And The Writ Of Mandamus, Derek T. Muller

Journal Articles

Election subversion threatens democratic self-governance. Recently, we have seen election officials try to manipulate the rules after an election, defy accepted legal procedures for dispute resolution, and try to delay results or hand an election to a losing candidate. Such actions, if successful, would render the right to vote illusory. These threats call for a response. But rather than recommend the development of novel tools to address the problem, this Article argues that a readily available mechanism is at hand for courts to address election subversion: the writ of mandamus. This Article is the first comprehensive piece to situate the …

Federal Pleading Standards In State Court, Marcus Gadson

Michigan Law Review

Most state courts cannot follow both their state constitutions and federal pleading standards. Even if they could, policy considerations unique to states compel state courts to reject federal pleading standards. This is because federal courts have changed pleading standards to allow judges to make factual determinations on a motion to dismiss and to require more factual detail in complaints. While scholars have vigorously debated whether these changes are wise, just, and permissible under the federal rules and the Constitution, they have ignored the even more important questions of whether state courts can and should adopt those pleading standards. The oversight …

Judges, Judging And Otherwise: Do We Ask Too Much Of State Court Judges - Or Not Enough?, Michael C. Pollack

Articles

Ask the average person to imagine what a judge does, and the answer will most likely be something right out of a courtroom from Law & Order — or Legally Blonde, Just Mercy, My Cousin Vinny, Kramer vs. Kramer, or any of the myriad law-themed movies and television shows. A judge is faced with a dispute brought by some parties and their lawyers and is charged with resolving it, whether it be a breach of contract, a tort action, a competing claim over property, a disagreement about the meaning of a statute, some accusation that someone …

The Democratic (Il)Legitimacy Of Assembly-Line Litigation, Jessica Steinberg, Colleen Shanahan, Anna E. Carpenter, Alyx Mark

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

In response to Daniel Wilf-Townsend’s Assembly-Line Plaintiffs we take a panoramic picture of state civil courts, and debt cases in particular, and name specific features of the courts that must be taken into account in crafting reform prescriptions. In doing so, we question both the democratic legitimacy of debt collection courts and the adequacy of incremental reform that targets the structure of litigation. Part I contributes two critical components to Wilf-Townsend’s rich description of consumer debt cases: pervasive intersectional inequality among pro se defendants and a record of fraud among top filers. We add a sharper focus on the racial, …

The Institutional Mismatch Of State Civil Courts, Colleen Shanahan, Jessica Steinberg, Alyx Mark, Anna E. Carpenter

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

State civil courts are central institutions in American democracy. Though designed for dispute resolution, these courts function as emergency rooms for social needs in the face of the failure of the legislative and executive branches to disrupt or mitigate inequality. We reconsider national case data to analyze the presence of social needs in state civil cases. We then use original data from courtroom observation and interviews to theorize how state civil courts grapple with the mismatch between the social needs people bring to these courts and their institutional design. This institutional mismatch leads to two roles of state civil courts …

Protecting State Constitutional Rights From Unconstitutional Conditions, Kay L. Levine, Jonathan R. Nash, Robert A. Schapiro

Faculty Articles

The unconstitutional conditions doctrine limits the ability of governments to force individuals to choose between retaining a right and enjoying a government benefit. The doctrine has primarily remained a creature of federal law, with neither courts nor commentators focusing on the potentially important role of state doctrines of unconstitutional conditions. This omission has become especially significant during the COVID-19 pandemic, as actions by state and local governments have presented unconstitutional conditions questions in a range of novel contexts. The overruling of Roe v. Wade and the resulting focus on state constitutional rights to abortion will offer additional new settings for …