Author: California Constitution Center
Overview The California Supreme Court is taking more time to decide fewer cases, and its majority opinions are getting longer. In the past, when the court was writing shorter majority opinions it did so faster and produced more of them. The current condition in general stems from trends in automatic appeals and civil cases, with each case type showing distinct contributing effects. These general and specific trends are most pronounced after recent trend inflections revealed significant distinctions between the case types. The court is deciding fewer automatic appeals and taking much longer to decide them. But these decisions are not...
Join friends, colleagues, and family for a celebration and retrospective on the life and career of Joseph R. Grodin, a unique figure connecting the UC law SF school and the California Supreme Court, as a former California Supreme Court justice and professor of law at UC Law San Francisco.This event will overview his jurisprudence as a justice on the Court of Appeal and California Supreme Court, his legal scholarship, and the historical and legal significance of the 1986 retention election. Open entry without registration, and broadcast on Zoom after Justice Kruger’s opening remarks. Click here to RSVP Click here for...
Joshua Spivak, senior research fellow at the California Constitution Center, died peacefully in his sleep on July 12, 2025 at age 51. He was the nation’s foremost — nay, only — expert on recall elections. He was a thinker and scholar who published many works to define the field he pioneered: books, academic journal articles, and hundreds of public commentary pieces. A frequent contributor to news programs and stories, Josh was everyone’s first call whenever a recall petition was filed somewhere. With his grand view, vast knowledge, and great passion for the subject, he was the definitive authority on recall...
Overview This year the California Supreme Court demonstrated that the past few years were a transition phase and gave some signs of what is to come. One year ago, in our 2023 year-in-review article, we observed that the court had settled into stasis, coalescing into such high unanimity that it simultaneously ruled out any appearance of partisan bias while also sparking concerns from other court watchers about uncritical groupthink and bare-minimum productivity. This year one factor in that discussion (the three-way split between the appointing governor blocs) remains the same, and in practice such partisan affiliation markers still provide no...
With just 30 days left before the California Supreme Court conference we have some FYI updates: We’re working hard to bring you a good experience. See you soon!
Our friends at the Brennan Center’s State Court Report have published a collection of advice for law students from eight sitting and former state supreme court justices. Read it here. The headliner is California Supreme Court Justice Goodwin Liu. Perhaps the best is this pithy reflection by Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick: “I would have advised myself to get better grades.” Sage advice for those of us who weren’t the smartest bears in the room back then, if only we knew. Subscribe to the State Court Report newsletter here — it’s a great resource for anyone interested in state...
Friday November 8, 20249:00am to 4:00pmLive in person at UC Law San Francisco and on Zoom. Click here to register! Program outline 8:00 to 9:00 Registration, coffee, and snacks 9:00 to 10:00 Chief Justice Guerrero keynote discussion about her transition into the role, the Judicial Council’s new leader and potential changes in administration, and the current state of the court. 10:00 to 11:00 Dean Chemerinsky will lecture on federalism, state sovereignty, independence of state high courts, and the limits of state power. 11:00 to 12:00 former Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye will reflect on her time on the court, her observations about...
Overview The key takeaway from the California Supreme Court’s recent decision in Castellanos v. State of California (S279622) is less about the initiative power or workers’ compensation and more about framing: how a court or advocate can control a case and direct its outcome by carefully defining the question to be answered. Here, by limiting the question presented to a narrow issue, the court set itself up to give a clear answer. This limited approach contrasts with the court’s comprehensive treatment of the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act in Legislature v. Weber (S281977). This contrast is explained by the...
The dean of state constitutional law Professor Robert Williams presents: State Constitutions & The Limits of Criminal Punishments Symposium Click here to register! October 24, 2024 8:30 am – 6:15 pm Rutgers Camden Campus Center – Multipurpose Room This symposium will engage with the growing legal and intellectual movement to challenge excessive criminal punishments—broadly understood to include both prison terms and conditions of confinement—via the anti-punishment and related clauses in state constitutions. The symposium will explore the interplay between state and federal law, and how state courts can emerge from federal law’s shadow through the text, history, traditions, and unique...
