Constitutional Law
Constitutional Law tests both federal doctrine and the independent force of Article I of the Oregon Constitution. Oregon courts ordinarily decide state constitutional claims first, using text, history, and precedent, and may give greater protection than the federal Constitution. Key areas are search and seizure, free expression, equal privileges, due process, and state action.
Core rules
- Article I, section 9 governs searches and seizures. A warrant is generally required absent an exception; Oregon's exclusionary rule is constitutional, while ORS 136.432 limits statutory suppression.
- Article I, section 8 protects speech, press, assembly, and petition. Oregon analysis can differ from federal doctrine, especially in public forums and expressive conduct.
- Article I, section 20 guarantees equal privileges and immunities; classifications need a rational basis unless they burden a suspect class or fundamental right.
- State action is required for constitutional claims; private conduct is reached only through statutes or common-law rules.
Worked example
An officer enters a home without a warrant to arrest a person for a misdemeanor. The arrest may be lawful in public, but Article I, section 9 treats the home as specially protected. The state must identify a warrant exception, such as consent or exigency; an exigency must be actual and not created by police. If the entry is unlawful, physical evidence and statements may be suppressed. Reasoning: locate the seizure, identify the privacy interest, then test the exception.
Traps
Do not assume federal doctrine answers an Oregon constitutional question; preserve the state claim. Do not confuse standing with the merits; do not treat all statutory violations as requiring suppression; do not overlook Article I, section 8 in injunction and protest scenarios.