Those who pay attention to constitutional cases in state courts earlier than late will see the phrase “natural rights.” Although it has been a standard American jurisprudence since its establishment, their trend has been increasing in recent years. What does modern state courts mean when they mention natural rights?
What is so natural?
Ask ten philosophers and they will probably enlighten you with 11 different takes. But in general, the core understanding from today’s American Revolution is that natural rights are political rights. It is the right that humans are just because they are human. In contrast, post-political rights are those gained by someone through the formation of an orderly society, such as voting rights or ju trials. Another name that is often used in the same way as natural rights is “Loccan’s Rights” after John Locke’s writings on the state of nature and social contract. The rights of nature or the rights of lockeans impose no demand on anyone, including the state, except that others have not infringed.
Watch out for emptor once you move to the state constitution! Terms such as “intrinsic rights,” “non-transferable rights” (or alternative 18th century spelling, “unreliable rights”), “essential rights,” and the beloved of the modern constitution, “fundamental rights.” Do all of these mean the same thing? Sometimes, it’s almost not always.
“Fundamental rights” include not only “states of natural rights” such as freedom of speech, but also politically procedural rights such as juju and voting trials. “Intrinsic rights” and “non-transferable rights” are generally synonymous with natural rights, but in the case of a litigant, the first thing to do is to check the state’s own constitution and the characteristics of the Cassero.
These conditions are not merely judicial gloss. Most state constitutions expressly refer to “natural” or “indigenous” or similar “rights.” Virginia, for example, declares that people are “equal, free and independent of nature, and have certain inherent rights,” while Vermont declares that “all people are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent, inevitable rights.”
Finally, there is “natural law.” What is the relationship between natural law and natural rights? It’s the question that these ten philosophers will give you more answers and best be left in another work. The simple answer is that natural rights are often part of the theory of natural law. However, the way natural law (whatever it is) intersects with the constitution does not need to be grasped in order to raise claims of natural rights in court.
In that context, how do state courts use today’s natural rights?
Naturally concrete
U.S. Supreme Court overturn Roev. Wade In 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Agency He threw many abortion lawsuits to the state. Given the “natural” and “inherent” languages in the state’s constitution, it is not surprising that this led to the boomlet of natural rights and state constitutionalism. Even in front dobbsthe Kansas Supreme Court in 2019 determined that its “Lockean Natural Rights Guarantee” protects “natural rights” to body integrity and that an aspect of that right is to obtain an abortion. Both the majority and the dissenting opinions were delved deep into the Locke, Declaration of Independence, and many others in all of the works of Natural Rights. The quest for natural rights in modern national constitutionalism would be sufficient to begin there.
Since then, the same court has reaffirmed its 2019 decision, featuring natural rights in abortion cases in many other states, including Idaho, Indiana, Pennsylvania and Utah. Some are victory for reproductive rights defenders, while some have won for the nation, but all take the idea of natural rights (or inherent rights or what you have) seriously, whether abortion itself is one of them.
All of these abortion cases involve “minor rights” or rights not expressly listed in the Constitution. Instead, the court read the right to abortion in the general declaration of “natural” or “individual” rights. Or, they refused to do so depending on which party arguments were carried that day in a particular case.
Perhaps all the most litigated natural rights are parents’ unapproved rights to direct the development of children, which the US Supreme Court has granted more than a century ago. State courts often – but perhaps not enough, as some judges argue – recognize that they must give their children strong weight and consideration when adjuring the issue of parental custody or visiting.
Recent cases protecting the natural rights of other minors include figures in which my colleagues filed lawsuits regarding their right to earn a living, whether the court has labelled “natural rights.”
Natural rights and similar terms should not be confused with substantial legitimate processes. It’s well understood and the substantive due process is simple how A legitimate process of legal provisions – protecting substantial rights that are otherwise not listed, such as those in the 14th amendment or in the constitution of many states. In reality, it usually refers to natural rights, but not always. Most importantly, “natural rights” can be protected as unapproved rights in many respects except due process clauses. You can rely on the above Lockean guarantees. You can also look at the “Ninth Baby Amendment.” They protect the rights “holded by people.” This, as discussed in my book, means natural rights. Additionally, some states have provisions that protect “privilege or immunity.” This is a natural right, such as phrases that can refer to many benefits. If one of these provisions protects an unauthorized right, it should not be called a “substantial due process.” (But this always happens in annoyance!)
It’s natural to list
However, most of the natural rights of an infinite number are not specific, but it is important to remember a lot in practice. teeth Enumeration. We see words on the pages, so we don’t consider them natural rights. But when people create constitutions, they often simply write down their political rights.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently granted this in “freedom of the press.” Virginia did the same with the free exercise of religion. Certainly, states not only enumerate natural rights, but some call them “natural rights” in their enumeration. Indiana’s constitution protects “the natural right to worship the Almighty God,” to name many constitutions. Furthermore, the right to be secured on private property, although some are listed in many ways, is often recognized as a natural right.
••••
To most lawyers, litigating natural rights may seem obviously unnatural. Law schools are taught to worry about jits and boobs such as contracts, bankruptcy codes, and legally defined crime elements. However, natural rights are based on the law. Just because some constitutional provisions are written in broad terms doesn’t mean they don’t do their real work. Sometimes converting that philosophical language into the actual protection of individuals to the state requires judges and lawyers who take them seriously.
Anthony Sanders is the director of the Judicial Institute’s Center for Justice and author of the book. Baby 9th Amendment: How Americans accept uncareful rights and why is it important?
Suggested Quote: Anthony Sanders, Natural rights of state courtssᴛᴛᴇcᴏᴜʀᴛrᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (July 7, 2025), https://statcourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/natural-rights-steskouts
