State Court Docket Watch
-
Violet Dock Port, Inc, LLC v. St. Bernard Port, Harbor & Terminal District
Docket Watch 2018
One of this year’s most acclaimed films, Little Pink House, has resurrected old wounds from the U.S. Supreme Court’s infamous decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). In Kelo, the Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which allows the government to take private property only for “public use,” could be used as part of an “economic development plan” to condemn houses in low income neighborhoods and turn them over to private corporations. According to the Kelo majority, the plan satisfied the Constitution’s public use requirement because it served a “public purpose” by (allegedly) increasing tax revenue and bringing jobs to the community.
-
Tetra Tech v. Wisconsin Department of Revenue
Docket Watch 2017
Across the country, conservatives and libertarians are making it a priority to roll back the administrative state. Over time, agencies at both the federal and state level have accrued seemingly unchecked regulatory power that infringes on our liberties and greatly blurs the lines separating the executive branch from the legislative and judicial branches.
-
In the Matter of Property Seized from Jean Carlos Herrerra and Fernando Rodriguez
Docket Watch 2018
By Greg Glod
On May 25, the Iowa Supreme Court issued an opinion in the case In the Matter of Property Seized from Jean Carlos Herrerra and Fernando Rodriguez that will have major implications regarding how the state’s civil asset forfeiture procedures will be conducted and in the process strengthened the constitutional and property rights of its citizens.
-
Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission v. Martinez
Docket Watch 2018
Are concerns over climate change sufficient to prevent all new oil and gas development in Colorado? In Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission v. Martinez, the Colorado Supreme Court will decide if language in a statute’s legislative declaration mandates that absolute protection of the public health, safety, and welfare is a precondition to the exercise of private property rights in oil and gas.
-
State of Alaska v. Alaska Democratic Party
Docket Watch 2018
In State of Alaska v. Alaska Democratic Party, the Supreme Court of Alaska affirmed a lower courts ruling finding unconstitutional a statute forbidding independent candidates from seeking a the nomination in a party primary.
-
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission v. Hands On Originals
Docket Watch 2018
By Jim Campbell
May the government force a Democrat to make signs for a Republican politician, a gay man to create flyers opposing same-sex marriage, or a Jewish woman to print posters celebrating German pride? Whether government officials have that kind of power is the question before the Kentucky Supreme Court in Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission v. Hands On Originals.
-
Maine Senate v. Secretary of State
Docket Watch 2018
In Maine Senate v. Secretary of State, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court (referred to as the “Law Court”) was confronted with statutory interpretation and separation of powers issues relating to the implementation of ranked choice voting. The case – not the first ranked choice voting case that Maine’s high court has considered – reached the Law Court under highly unusual procedural circumstances. Ultimately, the Law Court addressed only the statutory interpretation question, finding the constitutional issues non-justiciable.
-
Alamo Heights Independent School District v. Clark
Docket Watch 2018
Texas’s employment discrimination statute (the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act, codified in the Texas Labor Code at section 21.001 et seq.), like its federal counterpart (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. section 2000e et seq.), prohibits discrimination on the basis of enumerated characteristics, including “sex.” Accordingly, an employer is forbidden to treat an applicant or employee differently because of that person’s sex. Without a sex-based nexus, the employer’s conduct may be rude, unfair, obnoxious, boorish, or insensitive, but will not constitute illegal sex discrimination.
-
Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue
Docket Watch 2018
By Erica Smith
School choice has been a hot political issue this year, and now it is firing up the courts as well. The U.S. Supreme Court has long held that the Establishment Clause allows the government to include religious options in school choice programs. But it is still unclear whether the government may exclude religious options from these programs. A case now at the Montana Supreme Court, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, raises this issue.
-
Gunderson v. State of Indiana
Docket Watch 2018
In Gunderson v. State of Indiana, the Indiana Supreme Court, unanimously, held that 1.) Indiana owns in public trust the bed of Lake Michigan up to the Ordinary High-Water Mark (OHWM), 2.) Indiana has not relinquished its interest in the property below the natural OHWM, which is the legal boundary between State-owned property and private property, and 3.) walking along the shores of Lake Michigan below the OHWM is a protected public use in Indiana.