Constitutional Law
Overview
Hutchison & Steffen understands that Nevadans have a long tradition of fierce independence from government intrusion and overreaching. They expect government to respect and value their individual rights and liberties guaranteed in both the U.S. and Nevada Constitutions. The Firm has an active and high-profile practice in constitutional law. The Firm's attorneys have experience in property rights and Takings Clause matters, Commerce Clause litigation, and Equal Protection and Due Process Clause cases, including denial of equal protection of the law due to race, national origin, religion, and gender. The Firm represents individuals, corporations, states, and government officials in legal challenges to and defense of federal and state legislation and pursues legal claims involving governmental misconduct.
To discuss a constitutional matter with the Firm, call 702.385.2500 in Las Vegas or 775.853.8746 in Reno, or contact Hutchison & Steffen online.
Understanding The Practice
What Does a Constitutional Law Attorney Do?
Constitutional law governs the relationship between government power and individual rights. A constitutional law attorney litigates claims that a statute, regulation, or government action violates rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution or the Nevada Constitution, and also defends laws and public officials when those measures come under attack. The work is defined by its stakes: these cases decide not just one dispute but the rules that govern everyone after it.
Hutchison & Steffen practices on both sides of that line. The Firm has challenged government overreach on behalf of individuals and corporations, and it has represented states and government officials defending legislation against constitutional attack. That range is unusual for a Nevada firm, and it matters, because an advocate who has argued both sides of a constitutional question understands the strongest version of the argument coming back.
The Firm's constitutional docket centers on property rights and the Takings Clause, the Commerce Clause, and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, including discrimination claims based on race, national origin, religion, and gender. The Firm also pursues claims involving governmental misconduct, the category of cases in which public power is used against the very people it is supposed to serve. Takings work frequently overlaps with the practice described on our Condemnation Law page, where the constitutional principle meets a specific piece of Nevada ground.
Constitutional cases are often decided on appeal, and the Firm's experience runs through the Nevada Supreme Court and up to the United States Supreme Court. That appellate depth, shared with our Appellate Litigation practice, shapes how these cases are built from the first filing: the record is constructed with the reviewing court in mind. The Firm approaches every matter in this area without partisan framing. The Constitution is not a party platform, and the Firm's clients span the full range of people and institutions it protects.
Areas of Focus
Constitutional Matters We Handle
Takings Clause & Property Rights
The Fifth Amendment and Article 1, Section 8 of the Nevada Constitution forbid the government from taking private property for public use without just compensation. We litigate physical and regulatory takings claims, from land-use restrictions that strip property of its value to exactions imposed as permit conditions.
Due Process Claims
Due process requires fair procedures before the government deprives a person of life, liberty, or property, and it bars certain government conduct outright. We handle procedural due process claims involving licenses, permits, and public employment, as well as substantive due process challenges to arbitrary government action.
Equal Protection Litigation
The Equal Protection Clause forbids the government from treating similarly situated people differently without adequate justification. The Firm litigates equal protection claims involving race, national origin, religion, and gender, and challenges to classifications that single out disfavored groups or businesses.
Commerce Clause Disputes
The Commerce Clause both empowers Congress and restrains the states. We handle dormant Commerce Clause challenges to state laws that discriminate against or unduly burden interstate commerce, a recurring issue for businesses operating across state lines.
Defense of Legislation & Government Officials
Constitutional practice is not only about challenging laws. The Firm has represented states and government officials defending federal and state legislation against constitutional attack, work that demands the same doctrinal command as the challenges themselves.
Governmental Misconduct Claims
Two Constitutions, Two Sets of Rights
Federal Constitutional Claims vs. Nevada Constitutional Claims
Every Nevadan lives under two constitutions, and they are not identical. Choosing which charter to invoke, or invoking both, is one of the first strategic decisions in a constitutional case.
| Factor | U.S. Constitution | Nevada Constitution |
|---|---|---|
| Source of Rights | The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment, applied to the states through incorporation | Article 1, Nevada's Declaration of Rights, with its own text and history |
| Common Vehicles | Civil rights actions under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and direct constitutional challenges | State court actions for declaratory and injunctive relief under Nevada law |
| Property Protections | The Fifth Amendment Takings Clause sets the federal floor | Article 1, Section 22 adds owner-friendly rules, including a bar on private-transfer takings |
| Where Litigated | Federal district court and the federal courts of appeals, up to the U.S. Supreme Court | Nevada district courts, the Court of Appeals, and the Nevada Supreme Court |
| Interpretive Approach | Bound by U.S. Supreme Court precedent nationwide | Nevada courts may read state provisions to grant greater protection than the federal minimum |
Recognizing a Constitutional Issue
When Constitutional Litigation Becomes Necessary
Constitutional problems rarely announce themselves as such. They arrive as a denied permit, an ordinance that quietly excludes one business model, a licensing decision made without a hearing, or a state law that reaches further than its drafters acknowledged. The first task is diagnostic: identifying whether the government action crosses a constitutional line, and if so, which one.
Timing and forum matter enormously in this field. Some claims must first pass through administrative channels, others are lost if not raised at the earliest opportunity, and the choice between federal and state court can shape the doctrine that governs the case. Building the factual record with the eventual appellate court in mind is not a late-stage refinement; it is where these cases are won.
The Firm evaluates constitutional matters on their legal merits, for clients across the spectrum of parties the Constitution protects: individuals, corporations, states, and government officials. This page is educational and is not legal advice, and no outcome in constitutional litigation can be promised. What can be said is that these cases reward experience, and few Nevada firms have carried them as far as Hutchison & Steffen has.
Common Questions
Frequently Asked Questions
What does a constitutional law attorney do?
A constitutional law attorney litigates disputes about the limits of government power, either challenging a statute, regulation, or official action as unconstitutional or defending it against such a challenge. The practice involves trial work to build the factual record and, very often, appellate advocacy where constitutional questions are finally decided. Hutchison & Steffen handles both sides of these cases for individuals, corporations, states, and government officials.
What is the Takings Clause?
The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation, and it applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. It covers physical takings, such as condemnation of land, and regulatory takings, where a law or land-use decision goes so far that it effectively deprives property of its value or use. Nevada's Constitution adds its own protections in Article 1, Sections 8 and 22.
What is the difference between due process and equal protection?
Due process concerns how the government acts: it requires fair procedures, such as notice and a hearing, before someone is deprived of life, liberty, or property, and it bars certain arbitrary government conduct altogether. Equal protection concerns who the government acts against: it forbids treating similarly situated people or businesses differently without adequate justification. A single government action can violate both, and the two claims are often pleaded together.
Can you sue the government for violating your constitutional rights?
Often, yes. The primary vehicle is 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, which allows suits against state and local officials who violate federal constitutional rights, and Nevada law provides its own avenues for declaratory and injunctive relief. These cases must contend with immunity doctrines that shield many public defendants, so the viability of a claim depends heavily on the specific conduct, the right involved, and the relief sought.
Does the Nevada Constitution protect more than the U.S. Constitution?
In some areas, yes. The federal Constitution sets a floor, not a ceiling, and Nevada courts may interpret the state's Declaration of Rights to provide greater protection. Property rights are the clearest example: Article 1, Section 22 of the Nevada Constitution, adopted in 2008, prohibits takings that transfer property to private parties and defines compensation by the highest price the property would bring on the open market, protections that exceed the federal baseline.
The information on this page is educational and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Hutchison & Steffen. For guidance on a specific matter, contact the Firm at 702.385.2500 in Las Vegas or 775.853.8746 in Reno.