State Court Judges are Not Bound by Nonoriginalist Supreme Court Interpretations

23 Pages Posted: 17 May 2016  

Lee J. Strang

University of Toledo College of Law

Date Written: May 16, 2016

Abstract

In this brief Essay, I provide a tentative argument for modest state court interpretative independence. I argue that state courts possess interpretative independence from nonoriginalist U.S. Supreme Court interpretations. I also argue that state courts must follow all U.S. Supreme Court judgments (within the Court's jurisdiction) and originalist Supreme Court opinions. I close by suggesting that this modest state court interpretative independence is likely to advance federalism’s three primary values.

Keywords: originalism, supremacy, federalism, state court, precedent, stare decisis, federal courts

Suggested Citation

Strang, Lee J., State Court Judges are Not Bound by Nonoriginalist Supreme Court Interpretations (May 16, 2016). FIU Law Review, Vol 11, p.327, 2016. ; University of Toledo Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016-04. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2779244

Lee J. Strang (Contact Author)

University of Toledo College of Law ( email )

2801 W. Bancroft Street
Toledo, OH 43606
United States
419-530-2877 (Phone)

Paper statistics

Downloads
147
Rank
164,099
Abstract Views
382