Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
A164432
|
In re D.L.
Statutory provision criminalizing possessing a loaded firearm in public was not unconstitutional even though "good cause" licensing requirement of related statutory scheme was unconstitutional because the invalid provision was severable. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Markman | Jul. 6, 2023 |
21-476
|
303 Creative LLC v. Elenis
Colorado could not require a graphic designer to create tailored websites celebrating same-sex marriages that violated her religious beliefs since the government cannot compel someone to speak its preferred message. |
Constitutional Law |
|
N. Gorsuch | Jul. 3, 2023 |
22-535
|
Department of Education v. Brown
Respondents lacked Article III standing because they failed to establish that any injury they suffered from not having their student loans forgiven was fairly traceable to the debt forgiveness plan. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Alito | Jul. 3, 2023 |
22-506
|
Biden v. Nebraska
The Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act did not grant the Secretary of Education the authority to establish a sweeping student loan forgiveness program. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Roberts | Jul. 3, 2023 |
22-174
|
Groff v. DeJoy
Employers must show that accommodating an employee's religious practices imposed "substantial" costs rather than "more than de minimis costs" for the possible accommodation to be considered an undue hardship. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Alito | Jun. 30, 2023 |
20-1199
|
Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College
Justification of race consideration in college admissions process must meet particular standards to pass Equal Protection's strict scrutiny analysis. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Roberts | Jun. 30, 2023 |
21-1271
|
Moore v. Harper
The Elections Clause does not vest exclusive and independent authority in state legislatures to set the rules regarding federal elections. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Roberts | Jun. 28, 2023 |
22-58
|
U.S v. Texas
States lacked standing to challenging presidential administration's immigration-enforcement guidelines because their alleged injury was not redressable by the court due to the Executive Branch's exclusive discretion to prosecute offenses. |
Constitutional Law |
|
B. Kavanaugh | Jun. 26, 2023 |
E077772
|
Modification: San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors v. Monell
Voter initiative limiting San Bernardino County supervisors to a single four-year term was constitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Ramirez | Jun. 19, 2023 |
E077772
|
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors v. Monell
Voter initiative limiting San Bernardino County supervisors to a single four-year term was constitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Ramirez | May 30, 2023 |
22-166
|
Tyler v. Hennepin County
Plaintiff plausibly alleged that a Minnesota county's retention of the excess value of her home above her tax debt violated the Takings Clause. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Roberts | May 26, 2023 |
21-55149
|
Amended Opinion: Porter v. Martinez
Although restriction on using vehicle's horn was a restriction on speech, it was narrowly tailored to further government's interest in traffic safety. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Friedland | May 23, 2023 |
21-468
|
National Pork Producers Council v. Ross
Proposition 12, requiring certain pig confinement standards for pork sold in California, did not run afoul of the "dormant" Commerce Clause. |
Constitutional Law |
|
N. Gorsuch | May 12, 2023 |
G060988
|
Modification: Thompson v. Spitzer
Dismissal of residents' challenge to Orange County DNA collection program was reversed because participants were not informed of how their DNA samples could be used before waiving their privacy rights. |
Constitutional Law |
|
E. Moore | May 9, 2023 |
22-35457
|
Kennedy Jr. v. Warren
Senator's letter requesting Amazon review and adjust its algorithm so it would not promote COVID-19 misinformation published by third parties was not a coercive violation of the First Amendment. |
Constitutional Law |
|
P. Watford | May 5, 2023 |
B314220
|
Atkins v. St. Cecilia Catholic School
Summary judgment was improper where triable issues of fact existed regarding the ministerial exception's application to plaintiff, an office administrator and art teacher at defendant Catholic school. |
Constitutional Law |
|
V. Viramontes | May 2, 2023 |
C095234
|
People v. Bocanegra
Possession of an assault weapon charge did not violate defendant's Second Amendment right because an AR-15 rifle is not a weapon typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. McAdam | May 1, 2023 |
20-16294
|
Pyankovska v. Abid
Court erred in holding that *Noerr-Pennington* doctrine immunized husband's attorney from wiretapping claims because attaching a selectively edited transcript of a secretly recorded conversation was not a petitioning activity. |
Constitutional Law |
|
B. Parker | Apr. 19, 2023 |
D080921
|
Modification: Boydston v. Padilla
California's 2016 semi-closed presidential primary system survived a constitutional challenge because it minimally burdened unaffiliated voter and furthered the state's interest in orderly voting. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Buchanan | Apr. 18, 2023 |
G060880
|
Palmer v. City of Anaheim
Anaheim's 4% general fund transfer fee for its public utility department complied with the voter approval requirements of the California Constitution. |
Constitutional Law |
|
W. Bedsworth | Apr. 18, 2023 |
D080921
|
Modification: Boydston v. Weber
California's 2016 semi-closed presidential primary system survived a constitutional challenge because it minimally burdened unaffiliated voter and furthered the state's interest in orderly voting. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2023 | |
G060988
|
Thompson v. Spitzer
Dismissal of residents' challenge to Orange County DNA collection program was reversed because participants were not informed of how their DNA samples could be used before waiving their privacy rights. |
Constitutional Law |
|
E. Moore | Apr. 13, 2023 |
D080921
|
Boydston v. Padilla
California's 2016 semi-closed presidential primary system survived a constitutional challenge because it minimally burdened unaffiliated voter and furthered the state's interest in orderly voting. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Buchanan | Apr. 13, 2023 |
A163655
|
Modification: Castellanos v. State of California (Protect App-Based Drivers and Services)
Provisions defining what constituted an amendment to an initiative statute were unconstitutional as they intruded on both the Legislature's power as well as the Judiciary's authority to interpret the law. |
Constitutional Law |
|
T. Brown | Apr. 13, 2023 |
21-55149
|
Porter v. Martinez
Although restriction on using vehicle's horn was a restriction on speech, it was narrowly tailored to further government's interest in traffic safety. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Friedland | Apr. 10, 2023 |
C095486
|
Cultiva La Salud v. State of California
The Keep Groceries Affordable Act was unlawful because it was an intentional penalty on a charter city's lawful exercise of its power to tax groceries under the home rule doctrine. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Boulware Eurie | Mar. 29, 2023 |
21-35567
|
Chong Yim v. City of Seattle
Blanket ban on landlords inquiring about the criminal histories of current and potential tenants was an overly broad restriction on the landlord's right to free speech. |
Constitutional Law |
|
K. Wardlaw | Mar. 22, 2023 |
B316404
|
Regina v. State of California
Penal Code Section 28220(f)(4), which provided firearms dealer discretion on whether to sell shotgun to purchaser who had received an undetermined eligibility letter, did not violate Second Amendment. |
Constitutional Law |
|
D. Perluss | Mar. 20, 2023 |
21-55757
|
Olson v. State of California
Under rational basis review, Postmates plausibly alleged that Assembly Bill 5, as amended, violated the Equal Protection Clause for those engaged in app-based ride-hailing and delivery services. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Rawlinson | Mar. 20, 2023 |
22-35097
|
State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game v. Federal Subsistence Board, et al
Plaintiff's claim that the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act does not authorize the federal government to open emergency hunting seasons was excepted from mootness doctrine. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Bough | Mar. 15, 2023 |