Judicial Branch

If A state is sued in B state, do the courts of B state have to extend to A state the same immunities that they would apply to B state? And…can state A even be sued in state B?   

While this may sound like a nonsensical hypothetical, these are the issues the Supreme Court has agreed to decide in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. The State and Local Legal Center (SLLC) filed an amicus brief arguing that states must extend the same immunities that apply to them to foreign state and local governments sued in their state courts.

Grand juries historically were responsible for formally charging felony defendants in federal courts and in many state courts. Their role has changed very little to the present. However, recent events have caused some to question whether they are still a necessary component of those systems. The article below addresses the pros and cons of the modern grand jury process, as well as describing its historical roots.

Chapter 5 of the 2015 Book of the States contains the following articles and tables:

A 2014 report by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law predicts that the legalization of same-sex marriage could have a combined economic impact across all states of $2.6 billion during the first three years, primarily due to increased spending on weddings by same-sex resident couples and their out-of-state guests. In addition, the report estimates that legalization will boost state and local sales tax revenue by $184.7 million and support more than 13,000 jobs. The potential economic and fiscal impact varies across states.

The opinion upholds the constitutionality of the redistricting commission as a method to draw congressional and legislative redistricting lines after a Census.     

In Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar the Supreme Court held 5-4 that a Florida statute prohibiting judicial candidates from personally soliciting campaign contributions does not violate the First Amendment. Thirty of the 39 states that elect (rather than appoint) trial or appellate judges prohibit judicial candidates from personally soliciting campaign funds. 

U.S. veterans involved in the justice system face unique challenges. Since 2008, court officials have begun to step in to prevent jail time for veterans suffering from mental health disorders. Judge Robert Russell of Buffalo, N.Y., has offered one solution--specialized veterans treatment court.

This year’s Supreme Court docket includes many cases of interest to the states on controversial subjects like affirmative action and legislative prayer and more esoteric subjects like abandoned railroad rights-of-way and federal court abstention.

Declining budgets, the need for court reforms and efforts to rein in court power necessitate examining how courts work with or lobby other branches of government. This article examines existing research on how courts do intergovernmental relations work and focuses on the need for the development of best practices.

Challenging fiscal times have created a unique window of opportunity for court leaders to critically examine current business practices. One extant court function that has been the focus of reengineering efforts is the creation of the court record. Making the verbatim record is an essential court function that historically has relied on court reporters. Recent reform in several states suggests systemic change to incorporate digital recording technology in creating the record is difficult to achieve, but not insurmountable.