Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
22-55480
|
Iten v. County of Los Angeles
Landlord had standing to sue based on Contracts Clause violation when he alleged that the County eviction moratorium impaired the original lease agreement's contractual obligations. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Bybee | Aug. 31, 2023 |
G061609
|
People v. Ceja
California's felon-in-possession-of-ammunition statute does not facially violate the Second Amendment, as the right to bear arms only applies to law-abiding citizens. |
Constitutional Law |
|
E. Moore | Aug. 31, 2023 |
H050112
|
In re T.F.-G.
Defendant's Second Amendment facial challenge to California's firearm licensing regime failed because the unconstitutional good cause requirement was severable from the rest of the statute. |
Constitutional Law |
|
C. Lie | Aug. 28, 2023 |
S267138
|
People v. Martinez
Regulation prohibiting notice agreements between bail bond agents and inmates survived First Amendment intermediate scrutiny because the law directly advanced the state's interests in secure jail administration. |
Constitutional Law |
|
L. Kruger | Aug. 25, 2023 |
C097229
|
People v. Miller
Prohibiting carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle without a license does not violate the Second Amendment regardless of the constitutionality of California's firearm licensing statutes. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Renner | Aug. 25, 2023 |
20-35813
|
Hecox v. Little
Because of the likely Equal Protection Clause violation, Idaho district court did not abuse its discretion in preliminarily enjoining law that banned transgender female participation in women's athletics. |
Constitutional Law |
|
K. Wardlaw | Aug. 18, 2023 |
20-15948
|
Teter v. Lopez
Because butterfly knives are "arms" covered by the Second Amendment, and Hawaii's outright ban was inconsistent with historical tradition, it was unconstitutional. |
Constitutional Law |
|
C. Bea | Aug. 8, 2023 |
21-56056
|
Huntsman v. Corporation of the President
Because it was secular in nature, former church member's fraud claim as to church's use of tithe funds was not barred by First Amendment's ecclesiastical abstention doctrine. |
Constitutional Law |
|
W. Fletcher | Aug. 8, 2023 |
B314973
|
Coalition of County Unions v. Los Angeles County Bd. of Supervisors
Amendment requiring 10% of Los Angeles County revenues go to community investment was valid since it was grounded in the County's authority to provide for the operation of local government. |
Constitutional Law |
|
L. Edmon | Aug. 2, 2023 |
A164432
|
Modification: 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 | Aug. 1, 2023 |
A164180
|
Coalition on Homelessness v. City and County of San Francisco
San Francisco's policy of towing lawfully parked vehicles with unpaid parking tickets did not fall under the Fourth Amendment's vehicular community caretaking exception because it did not serve an immediate public need. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Simons | Jul. 25, 2023 |
21-55768
|
Nora Phillips v. U. S. Customs and Border Protection
Plaintiffs, seeking to expunge records gathered due to migrant caravan association, lacked standing because they failed to establish that the government's retention of records constituted a concrete harm. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Ikuta | Jul. 24, 2023 |
22-15323
|
Progressive Democrats, et al. v. Rob Bonta
Statute prohibiting local government employees from soliciting political donations but not state government employees was unconstitutional because it was not appropriately tailored to achieve the State's asserted interests. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Berzon | Jul. 20, 2023 |
21-16281
|
Amended Opinion: Jones v. Google LLC
Express preemption did not apply to children's claims because Congress intended to preempt inconsistent state laws, not state laws that are consistent with the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act's substantive requirements. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. McKeown | Jul. 14, 2023 |
20-35752
|
Amended Opinion: Johnson v. City of Grants Pass
Under the Eight Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, homeless individuals may not be prosecuted for protecting themselves against the elements. |
Constitutional Law |
|
R. Silver | Jul. 7, 2023 |
22-35271
|
Project Veritas v. Schmidt
Oregon law prohibiting unannounced recordings of conversations was facially invalid as a content-based restriction that violates free speech. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Ikuta | Jul. 6, 2023 |
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 |