State Court Report We dedicate our compensation to the state courts and the state constitution. Each state has its own constitutional and state-level judicial divisions. When a recent federal court ruling cut rights under the US Constitution, the state constitution and the role of courts means their role as guardians of independent rights.

But only a few law schools offering state constitutional courses. State Court Report It’s here to help.

I edited some of the explainers I think were law school. Whether this is an introduction to the state courts, constitutional law or a review, find these works.

How the State’s Constitution is Developed – State Constitution Amendment

A distinctive feature of the national constitution is that they can be changed relatively easily. The US Constitution only has 27 amendments, but 50 state constitutions have been amended about 7,000 times. The ability to be more responsive has been reflected in the 10 states that voters have recently approved amendments to abortion rights since the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Agency There is no federal right to abortion.

As Professor John Dinnan of Wake Forest explains in his Overview of the 50 States, this process varies from state to state and is employed in a constitutional amendment of states generated by legislative councils initiated by citizens, or recommended by committees. Regardless of how they occur, proposed amendments will generally be placed on state voters for final say.

When a state court has the final say – U.S. Supreme Court review of state cases

State court jurisdiction is broad and state court judges can determine both state and federal law issues. While state courts have a final say on the matter of state law, when interpreting federal law, the US Constitution and Congress may allow direct appeals to the US Supreme Court to ensure federal law is applied correctly. However, the situation in which the Supreme Court could review such cases is not always a clear reduction.

I wrote an article laying out complex rules developed around the Supreme Court review of state decisions. Most notably, the Supreme Court will not review state decisions, including issues of federal law, if it falls into “appropriate and independent” state status. State courts can clearly interpret and apply the state constitution to resolve cases, at least in a manner as protective as the federal constitution and law. When they do so, I explain, they should have the last word under this rule.

How state courts evaluate laws that limit rights – scrutiny level

Courts in all 50 states allow state lawmakers to pass laws that restrict the constitutional rights of states, but only to a certain extent. In determining whether a challenged law is too restrictive, state courts apply different tests (often referred to as the level or layer of scrutiny) that generally consider the rights affected, governmental rationales, and how restrictions relate to that government’s interests.

Morgan Munroe, a student at NYU, and I discuss “stricken scrutiny”, “intermediate scrutiny”, and “reasonable grounds” tests commonly used for state rights, as well as many federal tests, and interstate variations specific to certain freedoms, such as gun rights. The tests applied to laws challenged by courts usually determine how possible the law is likely to pass a constitutional convened.

National Constitution as a Protective Means of Democracy – Voting Rights

Voting and elections are important, often overlooked areas where state constitutions provide more comprehensive protection than the US constitution, meaning only the right to vote. As Professor Cardozo Law and Brennan Center Fellow Wilfred U. Codrington III writes, 49 out of the 50 state constitutions expressly and positively award the rights, including provisions requiring that more than half of the elections be “free,” “equal,” or “open.”

The state’s constitution generally provides clearer and more specific coverage on a variety of controversial issues that imply voting rights, Codrington explains, including disputes challenging voter registration, election management, elections, party primary elections, campaign finance and rezoning. Also, as mentioned above, it is a source of voters’ ability in many states to directly modify a state’s constitution through civic initiatives.

Enforcement tool to draw famous issues in state courts – Mandama’s warrant

Mandamas is a centuries-old relief, and can be filed by litigants directly bringing a keen issue to the state Supreme Court, written by University of Florida Law Professor Jonathan Marshfield. In principle, the court may order a civil servant to order a court warrant if such an order is necessary to protect the clear rights of the parties seeking it.

You may hear new lawsuits that generally seek Mandamas relief, not the US Supreme Court, but in court courts that are only in the federal system, but many state constitutions give this power to state high courts. That is, Marshfield writes, “In just a few days, a litigant can raise the issue before the state’s high court, and a small number of judges can decide the fate of the election, the candidate for the vote, or the allocation of national funds.”

The composition of federal courts vs. state courts – Judicial elections

While a federal judge is appointed, 38 states use elections to select or reselect additional terms. Judicial election, AS State Court Report As Alicia Bannon’s editors state in this overview, it could affect the way state constitutions are developed, including prior questions in state courts and compliance with past decisions. It can put judges – who are asked to play the role of rebutters, but rely on voter support to keep their jobs – in an uncomfortable place.

Especially since then dobbs The main focus of conflicts that have made state law the main focus of abortion rights explains that judicial elections have become the main political battlefield for most of the country, attracting tens of millions of dollars, special benefits and attack ads. The Supreme Court’s decision to reduce state restrictions on judicial candidates sharing their views on issues being contested and allowing unlimited external spending is also contributing to the current environment.

Other Jurisdictions – Territories, Tribes, Washington, DC

It’s not just the jurisdiction within the US. The five territories in the United States, Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands each have their own court system and constitutional or functionally similar organic conduct. In this overview, Brennan Centre adviser Michael Milov Cordova explains that these administrative documents function in many ways like state constitutions, with most territorial high courts having final words on local territorial laws similar to state courts. But the federal government’s authority over the territory also makes a big difference.

A similar paradigm exists in Washington, DC. Washington, DC is not a state or territory, but is a federal district subject to legislative oversight. In this article, Milov-Cordoba summarizes the distinctive features of the DC court system and the Home Rules Act. He is sometimes referred to as the district’s “de facto constitution.”

The American Indian tribes also have their own judicial and governing structures, including many constitutions, which also elaborate on.

••••

Although these articles focus on summarizing the state of play across the nation, State Court Report There is also a series that explains the history and habits of individual national constitutions. You can study yourself and gain insight into important functions that have been implemented more widely by the state’s constitution.

Sarah Kessler is an advisor and contributing editor State court report.

Suggested Quote: Sarah Kessler, Law Cheat Sheet: Understanding the State Courts and the Constitutionsᴛᴀᴛᴇcᴏᴜʀᴛrᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (August 26, 2025), https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/law-student-cheat-sheet-understanding-courts-constitutions