This law school casebook analyzes the Constitution of the State of Florida. It begins with the idea of a state being a "laboratory of democracy" where rights may be expanded or invented within the minimum requirements of the federal constitution. It explores the question of how a state constitution can produce its own jurisprudence in light of the supremacy of the United States Constitution. It outlines the canons of construction for the Florida Constitution. It introduces the concept that a state constitution can be a source of heightened civil liberties and fundamental rights. It explores this issue in greater detail by using the Florida Constitution as an example. It identifies Florida Constitutional rights without an exact parallel to those in the text of the US Constitution and asks whether Florida has taken its own path in interpreting or implementing the identified constitutional rights. It introduces rights enumerated in the text of the Florida Constitution that are not embodied in the text of the US Constitution. In so doing, it compares Florida's approach to those of other state constitutions. It addresses the familiar refrain that unlike the federal constitution a state's constitution is a restriction upon power not a grant of power. It looks at state constitutional criminal procedure by examining the ancient origin of the jury and the recent origin of Florida criminal procedure. Finally, it examines the US Supreme Court's acceptance of a state's inherent police power, and state-by-state differences in zoning and nuisance law, so as to better understand how eminent domain and inverse condemnation may differ under state constitutions such as Florida's.

Chief Justice John Marshall argued that a constitution "requires that only its great outlines should be marked [and] its important objects designated." Ours is "intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs." In recent years, Marshall's great truths have been challenged by proponents of originalism and strict construction. Such legal thinkers as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia argue that the Constitution must be construed and applied as it was when the Framers wrote it. In Keeping Faith with the Constitution, three legal authorities make the case for Marshall's vision. They describe their approach as "constitutional fidelity"--not to how the Framers would have applied the Constitution, but to the text and principles of the Constitution itself. The original understanding of the text is one source of interpretation, but not the only one; to preserve the meaning and authority of the document, to keep it vital, applications of the Constitution must be shaped by precedent, historical experience, practical consequence, and societal change. The authors range across the history of constitutional interpretation to show how this approach has been the source of our greatest advances, from Brown v. Board of Education to the New Deal, from the Miranda decision to the expansion of women's rights. They delve into the complexities of voting rights, the malapportionment of legislative districts, speech freedoms, civil liberties and the War on Terror, and the evolution of checks and balances. The Constitution's framers could never have imagined DNA, global warming, or even women's equality. Yet these and many more realities shape our lives and outlook. Our Constitution will remain vital into our changing future, the authors write, if judges remain true to this rich tradition of adaptation and fidelity.

"Privacy: The Lost Right is an authoritative overview of privacy in today's intrusive world. By analyzing the history and context of modern common law, tort, statutory and constitutional protections for the individual, Jon L. Mills exposes the complex web of laws and policies that fail to provide privacy protection. Identifying specific violations against privacy rights, such as identity theft, tabloid journalism, closed-circuit television, blogs, and Right to Die, he also provides a comprehensive assessment of privacy and legal remedies in the United States. Mills uses his experience as a former policy maker formulating Florida's constitutional privacy provisions and as an attorney in celebrity privacy cases to provide the leader with an understanding of the increasing intrusions in privacy rights, the possible harm, and available protections."--BOOK JACKET.

Demonstrates the crucial role that the Constitution played in the coming of the Civil War.

Florida Statutory Interpretation is a text designed for either a short stand alone course on Florida statutory interpretation or as a supplement for those wishing to integrate Florida specific materials into a course on statutory interpretation or on legislation more generally. It follows the conventional treatment of statutory interpretation found in standard textbooks on the subject. This book captures the doctrine on Florida statutory interpretation through recent leading cases and includes introductory materials, notes and questions in order to further explain and probe the doctrinal issues. Christopher J. Roederer is Professor of Law at Florida Coastal School of Law where he teaches Statutory Interpretation, Florida Statutory Interpretation, Constitutional Law and International Law. Professor Roederer is the co-author, with Professor John Knechtle of MASTERING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (2009) and Co-editor, with Professor Darrel Moellendorf of JURISPRUDENCE (2004).