Our Work

From Portland to Minneapolis, aggressive actions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents against citizens and noncitizens alike have been well documented. Many of these encounters raise grave constitutional concerns. Yet it may surprise—and alarm—many to learn that there is often no viable path to sue federal officers if they violate your constitutional rights, even egregiously.

Horizontal, interbranch competition is only one species of checks and balances. Especially in moments of politically consolidated federal power, the Constitution’s structure offers another, potentially more meaningful safeguard: the states.

State legislatures regularly propose and enact laws that seek to shape the substantive outcomes of state courts. These measures, including court-packing efforts, jurisdiction-stripping laws, and more creative maneuvers to change judicial selection or authority, would amount to legal earthquakes at the federal level. At the state level, these efforts often receive virtually no attention. This Essay brings the potent category of outcome-shaping court reform measures into focus and evaluates it as a question of state constitutional law.

Election administrators in the U.S. face persistent financial strain with local governments and their tax bases shouldering most costs while state and federal support remains limited. At the same time, states collect billions each year in unclaimed funds, which are assets like abandoned bank accounts and forgotten insurance proceeds. States are increasingly using unclaimed funds to support public programs like education and housing, but none have earmarked them for election administration.

Senior Editor Anna Bower spoke with Carolyn Shapiro, co-director of Chicago-Kent College of Law's Institute on the Supreme Court, and Bryna Godar, a Staff Attorney with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School. The discussion covered the state of Minnesota’s jurisdiction to criminally investigate Jonathan Ross, the ICE official who reportedly shot and killed Renee Nicole Good on Jan. 7. The conversation also covered obstacles state prosecutors might face in pursuing a potential prosecution and the likelihood that Ross could raise what’s known as "Supremacy Clause immunity."

As part of President Trump’s efforts to expand federal control over the country’s historically state-run election infrastructure, the U.S. Department of Justice has demanded copies of states’ complete voter registration lists, including voters’ highly sensitive data like birthdates, partial Social Security numbers, and driver’s license numbers. The Justice Department has filed federal lawsuits against 24 states (so far) and Washington, D.C., seeking orders compelling these jurisdictions to turn over their data. This tracker monitors the Justice Department’s lawsuits.

States don’t often prosecute federal officers, but they can. In this week’s episode, we talk to Bryna Godar, an attorney with the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School. She studies the power that states have to hold federal officers such as Ross accountable.

Shortly after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis on Wednesday, city leaders began looking into whether the officer had violated state criminal law. States have a long history of prosecuting federal officials for allegedly using excessive force on the job. And when federal courts agree that the force may not have been legally justified, they have allowed the state prosecution to proceed.

Amid federal upheaval, myriad important legal and policy developments continue to unfold at the state level. The Essays in this Special Issue were presented at, or grew out of, the fifth annual Public Law in the States Conference hosted by the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School in May 2025.

The U.S. Justice Department has demanded states' complete, unredacted vote registration lists. States have mostly declined to provide their full, unredacted voter registration lists. This report examines the questions raised by the federal government's demands about the long-established authority of states to administer elections and the scope of the federal government’s role in the voter registration process.