State Constitutional Law in 1929–1930

1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 666-686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver P. Field
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
State Courts ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Course Of Action ◽  
The Subject ◽  
State Constitutional Law

State courts determine, in the absence of constitutional provision to the contrary, whether amendments to state constitutions have been proposed and adopted in the manner provided for these constitutions. Not every minor deviation from the course of action marked out in the constitution for its amendment is deemed sufficient to justify the court in declaring that the amendment has been “unconstitutionally adopted,” but whether these deviations are serious enough to warrant such a declaration is a question to be determined by the courts themselves. Statutes supplementing constitutional provisions on the subject of amendment are valid if not in conflict with the constitutional provisions themselves, and substantial compliance with these rules is also required by the courts. Sometimes the provisions regulating the subject of publication of proposed amendments are constitutional; at other times they are statutory. In either case, publication in the manner provided for, and for the period of time provided for, is necessary to the validity of the amendment. Publication for two weeks, when the period should have been four weeks, was deemed sufficient by the Nebraska court to invalidate the amendment involved.

State Constitutional Law in 1948–49

1949 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 735-765
Author(s):  
Foster H. Sherwood
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
Police Power ◽  
Governmental Organization ◽  
Full State ◽  
The Subject ◽  
State Constitutional Law

The ever-increasing volume of litigation in state courts has made it necessary to exclude this year all decisions of courts other than those of last resort. In addition, with respect to subjects such as “police power” and “equal protection,” where classification or analysis of the decisions would require space out of all proportion to their importance, only a listing of the subjects involved in the case is attempted. The cases fall generally into the pattern used last year.I. GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION1. Special Constitutional Provisions. The effective date of a new constitutional amendment was the subject of two decisions this year. In one, the amendment extending the term of office of county attorneys from two to four years was approved at a general election in which county attorneys were elected. The court held that the officers elected then were elected for the longer term, even though the amendment by its own terms did not become operative until the January following the election. This was so, even though the required local notice of the amendment omitted the effective date, since full state-wide notice was published by the secretary of state. The other case holds that the amendment becomes effective on the date of the canvass of votes rather than on the date of the election. Here, too, there were irregularities in the published notice in that it was not published in all counties on the same days and minor inconsistencies appeared in the printed versions. The court held that the purpose of notice had been substantially served.

State Constitutional Law in 1932–33

1933 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 577-596
Author(s):  
Charles G. Haines
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
State Constitutional Law ◽  
Unusual Stress ◽  
Emergency Measures

One of the best known members of the bench in the United States raised the query whether constitutional law was not becoming so textual and so formal in its applications that it was losing touch with the realities of life. For the operations of government to be “cabined and confined” under ordinary circumstances raises difficulties not readily surmounted; but in times of unusual stress, either constitutional limitations unduly restrict urgent and necessary action or they must be ignored to permit emergency measures. A resumé of the decisions of state and federal courts affecting state constitutions for the year 1932–33 indicates the tendency both toward undue formality in interpretation and toward the warping of the constitutional mold to sanction ways and means of dealing with extraordinary conditions. Law, like life, is a matter of growth, and, as Lord Bryce long since observed, under written constitutions ways of growth must be found either within or without the provisions of fundamental laws.

Part IV Unique Interpretation Issues in State Constitutional Law, 12 Interpreting State Constitutions

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Williams Robert F
Keyword(s):  
State Legislature ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Constitutional History ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
The People ◽  
Unique Interpretation ◽  
Origin Function ◽  
The Voice ◽  
State Constitutional Law

This chapter discusses a wide variety of judicial interpretation techniques that state courts apply to state constitutions. Many of these techniques arise from the unique characteristics of state constitutions, including their origin, function, form, and quality, all of which are different from the federal Constitution. The chapter analyzes many of these differing approaches, including the question whether a state constitutional provision is self-executing; possible negative implications arising from grants of authority to the state legislature; interpretation based on the “voice of the people,” arising from the fact that state constitutional provisions are ratified by the electorate; the much wider availability of state constitutional history materials, some of it quite recent; and the possibility of a different view of the doctrine of precedent concerning judicial interpretations of state constitutions. The chapter discusses canons, maxims, and other approaches to state constitutional interpretation, such as contemporaneous construction.

State Constitutional Law in 1934–35

1935 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 610-630
Author(s):  
Charles G. Haines
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Constitutional Amendment ◽  
Constitutional Amendments ◽  
Sole Purpose ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
State Taxes ◽  
State Constitutional Law

Validity of Constitutional Amendments. The courts continue to scan with rather meticulous care the procedure for the adoption of constitutional amendments. Where the sole purpose of a proposed constitutional amendment under the initiative provisions of the constitution was to provide for the levy of a “syncrotax,” or a tax on the basis of gross receipts in lieu of all other state taxes, a petition with a short title reading “initiative measure providing for adoption of gross receipts act” was held fatally defective in view of the requirement that every initiative petition have a short title showing the nature of the petition and the subject to which it relates. But according to the supreme court of Florida, a proposal to amend the constitution need not have a title, need not be read on different days or at different times, and need not be concurred in by the governor. And the dissenting justices protested that the majority failed to uphold the requirement that a proposed amendment shall be entered upon the respective journals of the two houses with the yeas and nays, showing a three-fifths vote in favor of the amendment. There must be, however, a violation of express constitutional requirements for the courts to interfere with the procedure in the adoption of amendments.

Part II Rights Guarantees under State Constitutions: the New Judicial Federalism, 7 Lockstepping State Constitutional Rights with Federal Constitutional Law

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Williams Robert F
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The State ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Judicial Federalism ◽  
Federal Constitutional

This chapter discusses the practice — adopted by a number of state courts — of stating that state constitutional rights provisions will be interpreted identically to, or in “lockstep” with, similar or identical federal constitutional rights provision. State courts do this in a variety of ways, ranging from cases where they do not seem to acknowledge the possible difference between state and federal rights protections; to case-by-case adoption of federal constitutional interpretations; to “prospective lockstepping” where they announce that in the future the state and federal rights provisions will be interpreted identically or according to some other similar formulation. The chapter gives examples of these different approaches, as well as variations on them. It includes a specific focus on the wide range of state constitutional equality provisions, which, according to many state courts, are to be interpreted the same way as the federal Equal Protection Clause. These various forms of prospective lockstepping are criticized, on the grounds that they cannot actually represent “holdings” and are therefore not binding on future courts.

Introduction

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Williams Robert F
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
State Constitutional Law

This introductory chapter surveys the rise in importance of state constitutional law, the evolving recognition of state constitutions by scholars, lawyers, and judges, and the importance of the book at this point in time. The objectives of the book are outlined, and its methodology is explained.

scholarly journals ON THE SUBJECT OF STATE (CONSTITUTIONAL) LAW: MAIN APPROACHES TO ITS CONTENT

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-83
Author(s):  
Симкина Ирина Владимировна ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
State Constitutional Law

scholarly journals The Varieties of Constitutional Change

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Friedman
Keyword(s):  
New England ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
State Courts ◽  
Constitutional Change ◽  
Judicial Interpretation ◽  
Constitutional Development ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Robert Williams

New England Law Review. Vol. 51(3)(2018). While federal constitutional law has changed over the two hundred plus years since the framing, relatively little of that development was the result of the formal amendment process prescribed by Article V. Rather, significantly more change to our understanding of numerous constitutional provisions has come about through litigation over the meaning of the text. Regardless of the source of constitutional alteration, we regard the result as valid constitutional law. But that difference in source has fueled a great many efforts to legitimize judicial interpretation as a mode of constitutional change—to legitimize, that is, constitutional development by the least representative, least accountable department of the federal government. State constitutions, on the other hand, tell a different story. In the state constitutional context, the tension between litigation-driven change and amendment-driven change is diminished by the fact that formal amendment is a more realistic proposition that it is under the U.S. Constitution. This piece is an introduction to a Symposium on the relationship between state courts and constitutional change under state constitutions. The Symposium focuses on Jonathan Marshfield’s article, “Courts and Informal Constitutional Change in the States,” and includes responsive essays by Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Associate Justice Scott Kafker, Justin Long, James Gardner, Yaniv Roznai, and Robert Williams.

State Constitutional Law in 1935–36

1936 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 692-712
Author(s):  
J. A. C. Grant
Keyword(s):  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Constitutional Development ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Chief Justice ◽  
Fundamental Law ◽  
Law Courts ◽  
National Constitution ◽  
State Constitutional Law ◽  
American State

There is a kernel of truth in Chief Justice Hughes' remark that “we are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” To realize its full significance, “constitution” must be written in the plural. We have forty-nine courts of last resort, each interpreting the fundamental law of its own jurisdiction. The essential similarity of our state constitutions, and of our state bills of rights to that of the national constitution, together with the tendency of common law courts to follow each other's decisions, lend an element of stability to American state constitutional law that otherwise would be lacking. At the same time, even within so short a period as a year, the interplay of personalities may be seen moulding new doctrines in particular jurisdictions, which doctrines take on added significance because of the realization that they may, in time, serve as a basis for redirecting the course of constitutional development in other jurisdictions as well.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document