You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Lockstep Analysis and the Concept of Federalism
Earl M. Maltz
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Vol. 496, State Constitutions in a Federal System (Mar., 1988), pp. 98-106
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. in association with the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1046322
Page Count: 9
You can always find the topics here!Topics: State courts, Federal law, State law, Federalism, Exclusionary rule, United States constitutional law, Defendants, Legal evidence, Jurisprudence, Suppressed evidence
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Commentators on state constitutional law have been generally critical of those state courts that follow lockstep analysis. Often these criticisms have relied heavily on the concept of federalism. This reliance is misplaced; lockstep analysis is entirely consistent with basic notions of state autonomy. Instead, it is courts using other approaches that have at times ignored the basic theory of federalism.
The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science © 1988 American Academy of Political and Social Science