In a unanimous opinion, in which Justice Gorsuch participated, in Town of Chester v. Laroe Estates the Supreme Court held that an intervenor must possess Article III standing to intervene in a lawsuit as a matter of right if he or she wishes to pursue relief not requested by the plaintiff. The State and Local Legal Center (SLLC) filed an amicus brief in this case supporting the Town of Chester.  

Steven Sherman sued the Town of Chester alleging an unconstitutional taking as the town “obstructed his plans” to build a subdivision. Laroe Estates paid $2.5 million to Sherman for the property while Sherman went through the regulatory process. Laroe Estates sought to intervene in the lawsuit suit.

Money flowing into states from the federal government—either to individuals or through state and local governments—has a big impact on a state’s economy. In 2015, federal spending made up 19 percent of state economic activity, or gross domestic product (GDP). In five states—Alabama, Mississippi, New Mexico, Virginia and West Virginia—federal spending was 30 percent or more of GDP in 2015.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to review the Fourth Circuit’s recent decision temporarily preventing the President’s revised travel ban from going into effect. Numerous states supported both side as amici in the litigation. Numerous local goverments supported the challengers.

The President’s first executive order prevented people from seven predominately Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days. The Ninth Circuit temporarily struck it down concluding it likely violated the due process rights of lawful permanent residents, non-immigrant visa holders, and refugees.

The President’s second executive order prevents people from six predominately Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days but only applies to new visa applicants and allows for case-by-case waivers.  

In Kindred Nursing Centers v. Clark the Supreme Court held 7-1 that an arbitration agreement entered into by a power of attorney may still be valid even if the power of attorney doesn’t specifically say the representative may enter into arbitration agreements.

Beverly Wellner and Janis Clark moved their husband and mother, respectively, into a nursing home using their powers of attorney. Both wanted to sue the nursing home in court after their relative died. But both had signed contracts stating that any claims would be resolved through arbitration.

The Kentucky Supreme Court concluded that Wellner’s power of attorney wasn’t broad enough to allow her to enter into an arbitration agreement but Clark’s was. Regardless, the court held that both arbitration agreements were invalid because “a power of attorney could not entitle a representative to enter into an arbitration agreement without specifically saying so.” According to the Kentucky Supreme Court, this is because the right to a jury trial under the Kentucky Constitution is the only right declared “sacred” and “inviolate.”

By Brian Sigritz and Kathryn Vesey White
In December, the National Association of State Budget Officers, or NASBO, released the latest edition of its semiannual Fiscal Survey of States. According to data collected from state budget offices, fiscal 2017 is expected to mark the seventh consecutive annual increase in both general fund spending and revenue.

CSG Midwest
It’s an axiom, especially to those of us reared on “Schoolhouse Rock”: Bills originate in the legislative branch. That’s certainly the case throughout the Midwest — anyone can suggest a bill, but only legislators can introduce them for consideration.
CSG Midwest
Two of the Midwest’s governors recently signed bipartisan legislation to overhaul aspects of their states’ criminal justice systems.

Justice Gorsuch is certainly aware of that fact that his confirmation was one of the most political in recent memory. Only time, and perhaps his idiosyncrasies on the bench, will tell us whether, like Chief Justice Roberts, he is concerned about the Court being perceived as apolitical.  

It is difficult for those of us who treasure our democracy and our legal system in particular to accept the notion that Supreme Court Justices (and even regular old judges) are chosen for political reasons. We want to believe that our judges dole out the law evenly, intelligently, and objectively and are picked based on their perceived ability to do so--with justice as the end result.

But beyond the thin veneer of choosing someone with stellar academic credentials who has had an impressive legal career, politics always looms large in the selection of Supreme Court Justices. This is as much because a President doesn’t want to see measures he worked on overturned and wants his political party to succeed, as it is that Supreme Court Justices are a key part of a President’s legacy. A 49-year-old Justice like Gorsuch may sit on the Court for 30 years.   

Public pension reform is at the forefront of many state policymakers' agendas for 2017. Participants in this webinar will hear a summary of legal issues around public employee pension reform in layman's terms with a focus on constitutional concerns. We will cover which reform provisions have been shot down by the courts, which provisions have held up to challenges and any lessons a state leader can take away from the totality of those rulings.

President Trump has proposed several options for tax reform, including significant changes to personal income taxes. According to recent analysis by the...

Pages