State of Justice: June 2025
-
Vacancies
Kansas Supreme Court nominating commission recommends shortlist to governor
After completing its interviews with the 15 applicants for Kansas Supreme Court justice, the Kansas judicial nominating commission forwarded Douglas County District Court Judge Amy Hanley, Johnson County District Court Judge Christopher Jayaram, and attorney Larkin Walsh to Gov. Laura Kelly (D). One of the three will succeed retired Justice Evelyn Wilson. Wilson stepped down from the bench following a diagnosis of Lou Gehrig’s disease. Her retirement was effective July 4. Kelly must nominate Kansas’ next state supreme court justice from the three finalists sent to her by the non-partisan state judicial nomination commission.
Justice Janine Kern announces retirement from court at the end of the year
Justice Janine Kern, the longest-serving justice on the South Dakota Supreme Court, will retire from the bench in December. Kern first joined the court in 2014 following her appointment by Gov. Dennis Daugaard (R). The vacancy will be filled by Gov. Larry Rhoden (R). The state Judicial Qualifications Commission will screen applicants and share recommendations with the governor. The governor must pick from the recommendations provided by the commission. The appointee must stand for retention election in the next general election three years after their nomination.
Justice John Pearce will retire from supreme court in December
On December 1 of this year, Justice John Pearce will retire from the Utah Supreme Court. Pearce announced his intent to retire in a letter to Gov. Spencer Cox (R) in late May. With Pearce’s retirement, Cox will have the opportunity to nominate a third justice to the five-member court, creating a majority on the court. Cox must choose from a list of seven candidates, vetted by the state’s judicial nominating commission. The state Senate must then confirm Cox’s nominee.
Applications submitted for West Virginia Supreme Court vacancy
The Judicial Vacancy Advisory Commission was accepting applications to fill retiring Justice Elizabeth Walker’s seat on the court. The application window closed on July 4. Interviews will be held on July 17. Gov. Patrick Morrisey (R) will appoint a justice from a shortlist provided to him by the commission. That justice must be elected to the bench in the next general election.
-
Arkansas – Arkansas Supreme Court releases proposed rule for artificial intelligence
In response to AI usage in legal writing and case filings across the nation, the Arkansas Supreme Court released proposed court orders to prevent confidential information from being put into generative AI models. The supreme court also proposed the creation of a subcommittee to study the use of AI in the state’s courts. Comments on the proposed orders are being accepted until August 1.
California – Were cuts in rooftop solar payments legal? California Supreme Court hears arguments
In 2022, the California Public Utilities Commission reduced the rate credits given to customers that produce excess energy created by the customers’ solar panel installations by up to 80%. The original rate-crediting program gave credits to customers with solar panels, aiming to help offset the initial cost of solar panel installation. Environmental groups then challenged the reduction in credits, saying it hindered the expansion of home solar across the state and led to layoffs in the solar industry. Environmental and solar advocates are asking the court to order the commission to rehear the rule change.
California – California Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument on 30-Day Arbitration Fee Rule: Key Takeaways from Hohenshelt
The Supreme Court of California will determine the Federal Arbitration Act’s impact on the California Arbitration Act’s (SB707) requirement that an employer must pay its arbitration fees within 30 days or face sanctions and potentially lose its ability to arbitrate disputes. The case stems from a former employee seeking to end a labor arbitration dispute with their former employer, Golden State Food Corp., after it paid some of its fees after the mandated 30-day deadline. The employer argued that the FAA preempts SB707 because SB707 singles out and creates harsh punishments unique to arbitration disputes, which violates the FAA’s “equal-treatment principle.” The court’s decision will have a massive impact on California’s arbitration landscape and potentially upend SB707 and give more discretion to review arbitration disputes and fees.
Colorado – Colorado Supreme Court to hear case about relevance of consensual bondage activity
The Colorado Supreme Court will review the relevance of past consensual bondage activity in a criminal case involving the assault and false imprisonment of a woman. After an argument, Donald Gerle beat and confined his victim in a closet for two days. Gerle claimed the two of them had previously discussed such activities over text and had the victim’s consent. Prosecutors argued the texts could still not prove this specific instance was consensual. A district court judge blocked text evidence of those conversations from being introduced as evidence and from asking the victim about it during cross-examination due to the state’s “rape shield” law, which prevents discussing a victim’s sexual history. On appeal, the appellate court found the trial court erred in applying the rape shield law because that evidence could have clarified Gerle’s intent at the time of the crime. Now, the supreme court will review the court of appeals’ decision.
Colorado – Colorado Supreme Court accepts cases on police interrogation, mid-trial appeal
While police were obtaining a DNA sample from Angel Adrian Castro-Velasquez, detectives interrogated him.During that conversation, Castro-Velasquez confessed to the crime. Current Colorado law allows for police to collect “nontestimonial evidence” like pictures, DNA samples, or handwriting samples if police have “reasonable grounds” to pursue those types of evidence. Still, police are not permitted to obtain evidence beyond non-testimonial evidence. Castro appealed his conviction, claiming that police did not have probable cause to detain and interrogate him. A court of appeals panel sided with Castro, finding the police conducted an unlawful seizure. Now, the Colorado Supreme Court will determine if the police violated Castro’s rights.
In a separate case against Khristina Phillips, a woman accused of child abuse and operating a childcare facility without a license, the Colorado Supreme Court will determine if the court of appeals correctly ruled in tolling Phillips’ speedy trial clock. The prosecution sought to introduce Phillips’ video interrogation as evidence and filed two separate appeals to introduce the video and then to determine how much of the video may be played. In the process of the second appeal, Phillips’ speedy trial clock expired, and under state law, charges must be dropped and no further charges may be pressed against the defendant when the clock expires. The judge found that the prosecution acted in good faith, and the time spent during the appeal may not be counted towards the speedy trial clock. This led to Phillips’ conviction. Phillips then appealed before the state supreme court, claiming that the prosecution only filed those appeals to gain more time to organize their evidence at the expense of her speedy trial. Now, the state supreme court will step in and review the case.
Colorado – Colorado Supreme Court weighs time to sue for minimum wage violations in absence of directive
Samuel Perez sued his former employer for failing to provide required breaks for its employees. Because Perez left the company in 2017 and sued in 2022, the Colorado Supreme Court must determine how much time employees have to sue their employers for wage violations. There are two competing timelines before the court: one set out by the Wage Claim Act—which is the sister law to the state’s Minimum Wage Act—of three years, or the other determined by the state’s general statute of limitations to recover debt of six years. The court of appeals ruled in favor of the longer window because the Minimum Wage Act does not have a statute of limitations, unlike the Wage Claim Act, which has a three-year limit. Now, the state supreme court will review the appeals court’s decision.
Florida – State high court takes up case of drug-planting former deputy
Zach Wester, a former Florida police deputy, was convicted of racketeering, official misconduct, fabricating evidence, and false imprisonment after planting drugs on drivers during false traffic stops. However, a district court panel dropped his racketeering charges and ordered Wester’s resentencing because prosecutors did not meet the state’s RICO standards. Now the state supreme court will review the case.
Florida – Florida Supreme Court halts state Bar’s role in appointments to ABA policymaking panel
Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz, a former Trump administration official, criticized the national ABA as political and ordered the state bar association to stop making attorney appointments to the ABA’s governing and policy-setting body. Muñiz’s statement comes after the Trump administration cut the ABA out of the federal judicial nominee vetting process. Historically, the ABA would review federal judicial nominees and rate them. In the last Trump administration, the ABA rated 10 Trump nominees “Unqualified” for the bench. Moreover, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi criticized the ABA, calling it an “activist organization.” Muñiz also worked for Bondi as her chief of staff while Bondi served as state attorney general.
Florida – With enough signatures, marijuana amendment will be reviewed by Florida Supreme Court
After Smart and Safe Florida gathered over 377,000 signatures for a new constitutional amendment to allow adults over the age of 21 to use marijuana recreationally, the state attorney general will send the ballot language to the Florida Supreme Court for review. The court will review the language to ensure it covers a single subject. Last year, Smart and Safe Florida was able to have a similar amendment brought to the ballot , but it fell just short of the 60% threshold needed to pass.
A Georgia state Senate committee is subpoenaing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to testify before the committee and provide documents from her investigation into interference in the 2020 election, and specifically her former relationship with Nathan Wade, who was a special prosecutor in the Trump case. Willis appealed to the state supreme court, claiming the committee cannot subpoena her due to the confidential and privileged information the committee is seeking.
Idaho – Were Boise homeowners illegally taxed? Idaho Supreme Court to weigh in
Residents of Harris Ranch, a suburban Boise neighborhood, challenged a special tax placed on their community, claiming the tax made them pay up to 40% more than residents outside of their neighborhood. Harris Ranch is considered a community infrastructure district, where homeowners pay extra taxes to help developers improve local community infrastructure like roads and parks. In theory, these taxes are intended to alleviate the burden on residents outside of these communities. Residents further argued that the district is not valid due to the way it was created, as no one who voted on it would be required to pay the resulting taxes, the noncontiguous design, and the burden it places on tax district residents. After losing in the district court, the homeowners appealed to the Idaho Supreme Court.
Indiana – Indiana Supreme Court hears dispute over bush obstruction at rural intersection
The Indiana Supreme Court will determine if property owners or county officials have the responsibility to maintain visual obstructions from private property near a public roadway. After Yerano Martinez crashed his car into another vehicle, Martinez claimed a bush on Jeffrey Smith’s property prevented him from being able to see a stop sign and sued Smith for negligence. Smith and his attorneys argue that state law mandates property owners have no responsibility to maintain or prevent visual obstructions, and the county is responsible for maintenance. Both the trial and intermediate appellate courts sided with Smith.
Indiana – Ind. Supreme Court set to review constitutionality of private school vouchers
Indiana’s Choice Scholarship Program, which diverts state tax revenue to pay for private school tuition, is now under the state supreme court’s review. Plaintiffs, including the state’s public school superintendent, are challenging the program’s constitutionality before the state supreme court. The case skipped the court of appeals and went directly from the superior court to the supreme court. The plaintiffs claim that the use of the vouchers towards any school tuition that exceeds the voucher amount violates the constitutional requirement that school tuition should be “without charge, and equally open to all,” as well as the fact that the use of vouchers for private religious schools violates the constitution’s prohibition on the use of state funds towards a religious institution.
Indiana – Property tax case argued before the Indiana Supreme Court has major implications
Currently, in Indiana, there is a constitutionally mandated 1% cap on the assessed value for tangible property. State law further limits that 1% cap to only homesteads and a single acre surrounding its curtilage. For other residential property, the cap is 2% and for business property is 3%. However, there is no concrete definition in the state constitution and state law, which has led to the current dispute before the state supreme court. Lake County residents, the Sawlani family, challenged the way their property was assessed and classified and are asking the court to redefine and broaden the acreage exception to consider how the property is used rather than the textual limit. However, the supreme court’s decision could upend the state’s taxation system and leave some districts with little revenue should the court reassess how the 1% cap applies.
Louisiana – Voters could decide whether to raise the mandatory retirement age for Louisiana Judges
The Louisiana Senate passed a constitutional amendment to raise the mandatory retirement age for judges from 70 to 75. Residents will vote on this amendment in April 2026; however, a similar amendment was previously introduced and failed in all but two parishes in the state.
Nevada – Nevada Supreme Court Revives Governor Lombardo’s Lawsuit Against Ethics Commission
Gov. Joe Lombardo’s lawsuit against the ethics commission will continue in Carson City District Court after the Nevada Supreme Court overturned a district court judge’s case dismissal. The judge originally dismissed the case because Lombardo did not notify the attorney general’s office, but Lombardo claimed he did not notify the office because it had already recused itself from the case. The Nevada Commission on Ethics, whose authority Lombardo is challenging, fined and censured Lombardo in 2023 for comments he made during his campaign and for abusing his position as Las Vegas sheriff. Lombardo then challenged the commission’s authority to actually mandate punishment, claiming a violation of the separation of powers.
New Jersey – Fight over disclosure of FRT used by NJ cops heads to state Supreme Court
Civil rights organizations are asking the state supreme court to give an accused man information on the facial recognition technology used to identify him, as such access would be critical to evaluate the technology’s reliability and efficacy. The state court of appeals sided with the organizations and the defendant’s right to compel the discovery of evidence in the trial and have access to relevant information about the technology.
Ohio – Ohio Supreme Court transparency lawsuit against Avon Lake moves forward
Gerald Phillips claims the Brownfield Committee violated state transparency laws when it held closed meetings from December 2022 to December 2024. The committee is charged with the community’s economic development, as well as the remediation and redevelopment of properties within the community. Phillips sued the committee under the state’s Sunshine Laws for those closed meetings and not keeping minutes for those meetings, as well as access to records like contracts and invoices from those meetings. Sunshine laws aim to increase transparency and trust in government decision-making processes.
Ohio – Ohio Supreme Court to weigh in on Duke Energy bills
The Ohio Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is being sued over charges to natural gas consumers. The PUC retired its propane caverns and replaced them with the Central Corridor Pipeline. However, consumers were still double-charged for the caverns and the pipeline even after the PUC did not use the caverns. Now, the state supreme court will evaluate PUC’s ability to set those double charges. Oral arguments will be held on October 7.
Pennsylvania – U.S. Supreme Court rejects GOP request to review Pa. provisional ballot ruling
After the U.S. Supreme Court blocked conservatives’ attempt to throw out a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision mandating the counting of provisional ballots from voters whose mail-in ballots were rejected, the state supreme court’s decision mandating the count stands. This ensures that all Pennsylvanians can be confident that their vote will be counted.
South Carolina – South Carolina Supreme Court to hear case challenging online eye test ban
Current South Carolina law prohibits the use of a virtual eye exam to obtain a prescription for glasses. Now, a company based in Chicago that provides that service is challenging the law before the state supreme court, stating this law carves out eye exams and outlines different treatment compared to other prescription medications available via telemedicine. State physicians, however, argue that this kind of care must be delivered in person to ensure quality of medical care, despite their business incentive to retain business.
South Carolina – SC Supreme Court to hear challenge to state’s Congressional map next week
League of Women Voters of South Carolina is challenging the state’s Congressional map before the state supreme court, arguing that partisan gerrymandering violates the state constitution. Lawmakers previously stated they drew the districts to guarantee Republican victory, eliminating any toss-up districts in the state Under this map, there are six Republican districts and one Democrat district, the latter a district compelled by Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The League is asking the court to throw out the map and order the General Assembly to draw new boundaries without consideration of partisanship.
Virginia – Supreme Court of Virginia bars nonrefundable advanced legal fees
Following a petition to reform Rule 1.5 in the state Rules of Professional Conduct from the Virginia State Bar Association to the Supreme Court of Virginia, nonrefundable advance legal fees or fees clients pay to their attorneys before their attorneys perform legal services are banned in Virginia. Prior to the supreme court’s decision, there was confusion about what those legal fees are, despite several state legal ethics opinions. This decision codifies the ban in the state and prevents clients from potentially paying for and not receiving any legal fees if they choose to fire their attorney.
Wisconsin – Chief Justice Ann Walsh Bradley says politicization is ‘dangerous’ to future of the court
Retiring Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Walsh Bradley warned about the consequences of the politicization of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, saying it undermines public trust and integrity in the judicial branch. Bradley also pointed to the record high outside spending in the state supreme court election this past April with over $115 million spent to influence the election.
