Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
20-16294
|
Pyankovska v. Abid
Court erred in holding that *Noerr-Pennington* doctrine immunized husband's attorney from wiretapping claims because attaching a selectively edited transcript of a secretly recorded conversation was not a petitioning activity. |
Constitutional Law |
|
B. Parker | Apr. 19, 2023 |
D080921
|
Modification: Boydston v. Padilla
California's 2016 semi-closed presidential primary system survived a constitutional challenge because it minimally burdened unaffiliated voter and furthered the state's interest in orderly voting. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Buchanan | Apr. 18, 2023 |
G060880
|
Palmer v. City of Anaheim
Anaheim's 4% general fund transfer fee for its public utility department complied with the voter approval requirements of the California Constitution. |
Constitutional Law |
|
W. Bedsworth | Apr. 18, 2023 |
D080921
|
Modification: Boydston v. Weber
California's 2016 semi-closed presidential primary system survived a constitutional challenge because it minimally burdened unaffiliated voter and furthered the state's interest in orderly voting. |
Constitutional Law |
|
Apr. 18, 2023 | |
G060988
|
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 | Apr. 13, 2023 |
D080921
|
Boydston v. Padilla
California's 2016 semi-closed presidential primary system survived a constitutional challenge because it minimally burdened unaffiliated voter and furthered the state's interest in orderly voting. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Buchanan | Apr. 13, 2023 |
A163655
|
Modification: Castellanos v. State of California (Protect App-Based Drivers and Services)
Provisions defining what constituted an amendment to an initiative statute were unconstitutional as they intruded on both the Legislature's power as well as the Judiciary's authority to interpret the law. |
Constitutional Law |
|
T. Brown | Apr. 13, 2023 |
21-55149
|
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 | Apr. 10, 2023 |
C095486
|
Cultiva La Salud v. State of California
The Keep Groceries Affordable Act was unlawful because it was an intentional penalty on a charter city's lawful exercise of its power to tax groceries under the home rule doctrine. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Boulware Eurie | Mar. 29, 2023 |
21-35567
|
Chong Yim v. City of Seattle
Blanket ban on landlords inquiring about the criminal histories of current and potential tenants was an overly broad restriction on the landlord's right to free speech. |
Constitutional Law |
|
K. Wardlaw | Mar. 22, 2023 |
B316404
|
Regina v. State of California
Penal Code Section 28220(f)(4), which provided firearms dealer discretion on whether to sell shotgun to purchaser who had received an undetermined eligibility letter, did not violate Second Amendment. |
Constitutional Law |
|
D. Perluss | Mar. 20, 2023 |
21-55757
|
Olson v. State of California
Under rational basis review, Postmates plausibly alleged that Assembly Bill 5, as amended, violated the Equal Protection Clause for those engaged in app-based ride-hailing and delivery services. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Rawlinson | Mar. 20, 2023 |
22-35097
|
State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game v. Federal Subsistence Board, et al
Plaintiff's claim that the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act does not authorize the federal government to open emergency hunting seasons was excepted from mootness doctrine. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Bough | Mar. 15, 2023 |
A163655
|
Castellanos v. State of California (Protect App-Based Drivers and Services)
Provisions defining what constituted an amendment to an initiative statute were unconstitutional as they intruded on both the Legislature's power as well as the Judiciary's authority to interpret the law. |
Constitutional Law |
|
T. Brown | Mar. 15, 2023 |
21-16233
|
Forbes Media LLC et al. v. USA
The First Amendment did not provide journalist access to sealed All Writs Act technical assistance materials relating to an ongoing criminal investigation involving a fugitive. |
Constitutional Law |
|
D. Bress | Mar. 14, 2023 |
22-15071
|
O'Handley v. Weber
Twitter was not a state actor where it removed a post according to its own content moderation policies and user agreement despite the fact that the removed post was initially flagged by a state agency. |
Constitutional Law |
|
P. Watford | Mar. 13, 2023 |
22-15824
|
No on E v. David Chiu
San Francisco ordinance requiring political groups identify top contributors in advertisements did not violate First Amendment because it was narrowly tailored to accomplish the important governmental interest of providing voters information. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Graber | Mar. 9, 2023 |
20-16174
|
Twitter Inc. v. Garland
Government redactions of Twitter transparency report were narrowly tailored to support the compelling government interest in national security. |
Constitutional Law |
|
D. Bress | Mar. 7, 2023 |
B310811
|
Modification: So. California Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Governmental entity's discovery requests that sought all sources of funding for company's lobbying activities were not narrowly tailored to avoid unnecessary interference with constitutionally protected activities. |
Constitutional Law |
|
V. Chaney | Feb. 7, 2023 |
B319819
|
In re K.C.
Probation condition preventing minor from engaging in any unconsented sexual touching was not unconstitutionally vague since it provided a fair warning of the prohibited conduct. |
Constitutional Law |
|
A. Gilbert | Jan. 25, 2023 |
18-30106
|
U.S. v. Lillard
Defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice was not violated when the Government seized funds in his untainted inmate trust account pursuant to a valid restitution order. |
Constitutional Law |
|
J. Sung | Jan. 18, 2023 |
B310811
|
So. California Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Commission
Governmental entity's discovery requests that sought all sources of funding for company's lobbying activities were not narrowly tailored to avoid unnecessary interference with constitutionally protected activities. |
Constitutional Law |
|
V. Chaney | Jan. 10, 2023 |
F082053
|
Dominguez v. Bonta
Plaintiffs lacked standing because the alleged injuries suffered as a result of the challenged laws affecting legal fees for professional negligence claims were too speculative and hypothetical. |
Constitutional Law |
|
R. Peña | Jan. 10, 2023 |
H049161
|
County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court (AT&T Mobility)
Higher property tax rates assessed on utilities were not violations of Article XIII, Section 19 of the California Constitution. |
Constitutional Law |
|
C. Wilson | Jan. 10, 2023 |
21-56197
|
Lathus v. City of Huntington Beach
The First Amendment does not protect a volunteer member of a municipal advisory board from dismissal by the city councilperson who appointed her and who is authorized under a city ordinance to remove her. |
Constitutional Law |
|
A. Hurwitz | Jan. 6, 2023 |
21-16281
|
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 | Dec. 29, 2022 |
20-16540
|
Chen v. Albany School District
Student's off-campus social media posts bore sufficient nexus to school to warrant the school district's use of its regulatory authority to discipline student by expelling him. |
Constitutional Law |
|
D. Collins | Dec. 28, 2022 |
A163026
|
Doe v. Finke
Plaintiff's equal protection challenge to law excluding registered sex offenders from serving on juries was denied because the law was reasonably related to promoting legitimate goal of assuring impartial juries. |
Constitutional Law |
|
M. Miller | Dec. 23, 2022 |
21-15869
|
Amended Opinion: Twitter v. Paxton
A case was not prudentially ripe because the attorney general was still in the process of investigating and had not even decided whether to pursue claims. |
Constitutional Law |
|
R. Nelson | Dec. 15, 2022 |
21-15737
|
Waln v. Dysart School District
Plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to assert that school district selectively enforced policy to permit students to wear secular messages on their graduation caps while forbidding students to wear religious messages on their caps. |
Constitutional Law |
|
S. Graber | Dec. 12, 2022 |