Evan Scott Grant v. Nevada Board of Parole Commissioners, et al.

“When confronted with two Acts of Congress allegedly touching on the same topic, this Court is not at ‘liberty to pick and choose among congressional enactments’ and must instead strive ‘to give effect to both.’” Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S.Ct. 1612, 1624 (2018) (citation omitted). Furthermore, for one act to supersede another there must be “a clearly expressed congressional intention[.]” Id. However, within this Court’s jurisprudence of these principles are no applications to acts of state legislative bodies in which two separate laws concern the same topic. While this Court’s precedent dictates that separate acts passed sequentially by Congress concerning the same topic should be interpreted harmoniously, it has not determined what should be done when two acts are passed simultaneously concerning the same topic when one act does not reference the other, and whether these statutory interpretation precedents apply to state acts as well. Furthermore, the Nevada Supreme Court has affirmed a lower court’s opinion that a statutory right is not a liberty interest which conflicts with over 100 years of this Court’s Due Process precedent. The questions presented are: Whether two separate acts passed by a state legislature concerning the same topic should be interpreted harmoniously when the language of neither act directly references the other. Whether it is possible for a statutory right to not be protectable under the 5th and 14th Amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America.