legalis-us

United States Jurisdiction Support for Legalis-RS

Overview

legalis-us provides comprehensive Common Law system support for the Legalis-RS framework, including:

• Restatement of Torts (ALI) - Synthesized principles from case law
• Landmark Cases - Precedential decisions (Palsgraf, Donoghue, etc.)
• State-Specific Laws - Variations across 51 jurisdictions (all 50 states + DC)
• Choice of Law - Multi-state conflict resolution (5 approaches)
• Uniform Acts - UCC and UPA adoption tracking across states
• Federal-State Boundary - Preemption and Commerce Clause analysis
• Professional Licensing - Attorney (UBE), physician (IMLC), architect (NCARB) licensing
• Tax Law Variations - Income, sales, and corporate tax across all jurisdictions
• Legislative Tracking - Policy adoption (cannabis, privacy, right to repair) and constitutional provisions

Current Status

Phase 1 (Core Infrastructure): 100% Complete ✅ Phase 2 (State Expansion): 100% Complete ✅ Phase 3 (Professional Licensing): 100% Complete ✅ Phase 4 (Tax Law Variations): 100% Complete ✅ Phase 5 (Legislative Tracking): 100% Complete ✅

• ✅ Phase 1A: Foundation (types, registry) - 880 lines
• ✅ Phase 1B: 5 Priority States (CA, NY, TX, LA, FL) - 2,130 lines
• ✅ Phase 1C: State Law Comparator - 420 lines
• ✅ Phase 1D: Choice of Law Enhancement - 1,354 lines
• ✅ Phase 1E: Uniform Acts Tracker - 1,502 lines
• ✅ Phase 1F: Federal-State Boundary - 1,106 lines
• ✅ Phase 2: Remaining 45 States + DC (51 total) - 5,331 lines
• ✅ Phase 3: Professional Licensing (Attorney, Medical, Architect) - 1,667 lines
• ✅ Phase 4: Tax Law Variations (Income, Sales, Corporate) - 1,197 lines
• ✅ Phase 5: Legislative Tracking (Policy Adoption, Constitutional Provisions) - 1,100 lines
• 436 tests passing, 0 warnings
• Total: ~18,700+ lines of production code

Features

1. Restatement of Torts (ALI)

The American Law Institute's Restatement of Torts synthesizes Common Law principles into structured rules:

use legalis_us::{section_158_battery, section_46_iied, section_402a_products_liability};

// Battery - Harmful or offensive contact
let battery = section_158_battery();
assert!(battery.name.contains("158"));

// IIED - Extreme and outrageous conduct
let iied = section_46_iied();
assert!(iied.name.contains("46"));

// Products liability - Strict liability
let products = section_402a_products_liability();
assert!(products.name.contains("402A"));

Sections Available:

• § 158 - Battery: Harmful or offensive contact with another's person
• § 46 - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): Extreme and outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress
• § 402A - Products Liability: Strict liability for defective products

2. Landmark Tort Cases

Famous cases that established key precedents:

use legalis_us::{palsgraf_v_long_island, donoghue_v_stevenson, garratt_v_dailey};

// Foreseeability in negligence
let palsgraf = palsgraf_v_long_island();
assert_eq!(palsgraf.year, 1928);
assert!(palsgraf.holding.contains("foreseeable"));

// Neighbor principle and duty of care
let donoghue = donoghue_v_stevenson();
assert_eq!(donoghue.year, 1932);

// Intent in battery
let garratt = garratt_v_dailey();
assert_eq!(garratt.year, 1955);

Cases Available:

• Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad (1928) - Foreseeability in negligence
• Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) - Neighbor principle and duty of care
• Garratt v. Dailey (1955) - Intent in battery
• Vosburg v. Putney (1891) - Transferred intent doctrine

3. State-Specific Laws (5 Priority States)

Compare legal rules across different US states:

California

use legalis_us::states::california::CaliforniaLaw;

let ca = CaliforniaLaw::default();

// Pure comparative negligence (Li v. Yellow Cab, 1975)
let comp_neg = ca.comparative_negligence_variation();
assert_eq!(comp_neg.rule, StateRule::PureComparativeNegligence);

// Interest analysis choice-of-law approach
assert_eq!(ca.choice_of_law_approach(), ChoiceOfLawApproach::InterestAnalysis);

// CCPA privacy protection
let ccpa = ca.ccpa_statute();
assert!(ccpa.is_valid());

New York

use legalis_us::states::new_york::NewYorkLaw;

let ny = NewYorkLaw::default();

// Pure comparative negligence (CPLR § 1411)
let comp_neg = ny.comparative_negligence_variation();
assert_eq!(comp_neg.rule, StateRule::PureComparativeNegligence);

// Cardozo legacy integration
let palsgraf_integration = ny.integrate_palsgraf();
assert!(palsgraf_integration.is_some());

Texas

use legalis_us::states::texas::TexasLaw;

let tx = TexasLaw::default();

// Modified comparative negligence (51% bar)
let comp_neg = tx.comparative_negligence_variation();
assert_eq!(comp_neg.rule, StateRule::ModifiedComparative51);

// Medical malpractice damage caps
let med_mal_cap = tx.medical_malpractice_cap();
assert_eq!(med_mal_cap, 250_000); // $250,000 non-economic

Louisiana (Special: Only Civil Law State)

use legalis_us::states::louisiana::LouisianaLaw;

let la = LouisianaLaw::default();

// Louisiana Civil Code Article 2315 (tort)
let article_2315 = la.article_2315_delict();
assert!(article_2315.is_valid());

// Compare with other Civil Law jurisdictions
let comparison = la.compare_with_minpo_709(); // Japan Minpo 709
assert!(comparison.similarity > 0.70);

let comparison = la.compare_with_code_civil_1240(); // France
assert!(comparison.similarity > 0.80);

Florida

use legalis_us::states::florida::FloridaLaw;

let fl = FloridaLaw::default();

// Pure comparative negligence
let comp_neg = fl.comparative_negligence_variation();
assert_eq!(comp_neg.rule, StateRule::PureComparativeNegligence);

// Stand Your Ground law
let stand_your_ground = fl.stand_your_ground_statute();
assert!(stand_your_ground.is_valid());

4. State Law Comparator

Compare legal rules across multiple states:

use legalis_us::states::{StateLawComparator, LegalTopic};

let comparator = StateLawComparator::new();

// Compare comparative negligence rules across 5 states
let comparison = comparator.compare_states(
    LegalTopic::ComparativeNegligence,
    &["CA", "NY", "TX", "NC", "FL"],
);

// Get majority rule
assert!(comparison.majority_rule.is_some());
assert_eq!(comparison.majority_rule.unwrap(), StateRule::PureComparativeNegligence);

// Get minority states
let minority = comparison.minority_states();
assert!(minority.contains(&"TX")); // Modified 51%
assert!(minority.contains(&"NC")); // Contributory negligence

// Generate comparison report
let report = comparator.generate_report(&comparison);
println!("{}", report);

Comparison Topics:

• Comparative Negligence (Pure vs Modified 50% vs 51% vs Contributory)
• Joint and Several Liability
• Dram Shop Liability
• Products Liability variations
• Statute of Limitations
• Damage Caps

5. Choice of Law Analysis

Determine which state's law applies to multi-state disputes:

use legalis_us::choice_of_law::{USChoiceOfLawAnalyzer, ChoiceOfLawApproach};
use legalis_core::LegalFacts;

// Create analyzer with Restatement (Second) approach (majority rule)
let analyzer = USChoiceOfLawAnalyzer::new(ChoiceOfLawApproach::RestatementSecond);

// Analyze tort scenario
let mut facts = LegalFacts::new();
facts.add_location("Injury occurred", "CA");
facts.add_location("Conduct occurred", "NY");
facts.add_location("Plaintiff resides", "CA");
facts.add_location("Defendant resides", "NY");

let result = analyzer.analyze(&facts);

// Result indicates which state's law applies
assert!(result.governing_jurisdiction.is_some());
println!("Governing law: {}", result.governing_jurisdiction.unwrap());
println!("Confidence: {:.1}%", result.confidence * 100.0);

Approaches Supported:

• Restatement (First): Traditional "place of wrong" rule
• Restatement (Second): Modern "most significant relationship" test (44 states)
• Interest Analysis: California approach
• Better Law: Minnesota approach
• Combined Modern: New York approach

6. Uniform Acts Tracker

Track adoption status of uniform laws across states:

UCC (Uniform Commercial Code)

use legalis_us::uniform_acts::{UCCTracker, UCCArticle};

let tracker = UCCTracker::new();

// Check if state adopted UCC Article 2 (Sales)
assert!(tracker.has_adopted("CA", UCCArticle::Article2));
assert!(tracker.has_adopted("NY", UCCArticle::Article2));
assert!(!tracker.has_adopted("LA", UCCArticle::Article2)); // Louisiana exception

// Get state-specific variations
let variations = tracker.state_variations("CA", UCCArticle::Article2);
for variation in variations {
    println!("CA variation: {}", variation);
}

// Compare adoptions across states
let comparison = tracker.compare_adoptions(UCCArticle::Article2);
assert_eq!(comparison.adopted_count, 50); // All states except LA

UPA (Uniform Partnership Act)

use legalis_us::uniform_acts::{UPATracker, PartnershipActVersion};

let tracker = UPATracker::new();

// Check which states adopted RUPA (Revised 1997)
let rupa_states = tracker.rupa_states();
assert!(rupa_states.len() > 40); // Majority adoption

// Check adoption percentage
let percentage = tracker.rupa_adoption_percentage();
assert!(percentage > 80.0);

// Louisiana uses Civil Code instead
let la_adoption = tracker.get_adoption("LA").unwrap();
assert_eq!(la_adoption.version, PartnershipActVersion::Custom);

7. Federal-State Boundary Analysis

Analyze federal preemption and Commerce Clause constraints:

Preemption Analysis

use legalis_us::federal::{PreemptionAnalysis, PreemptionType, FieldPreemptionAnalysis};

// Express preemption example (FAAAA)
let analysis = PreemptionAnalysis::new(
    "Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act",
    "California AB5 (worker classification)",
)
.with_express_language(
    "a State may not enact or enforce a law related to a price, route, or service"
)
.with_subject_matter("Motor carrier regulation");

let result = analysis.analyze();
assert_eq!(result.preemption_type, PreemptionType::Express);
assert!(result.preempted);
assert!(result.confidence > 0.90);

// Field preemption example (immigration)
let field = FieldPreemptionAnalysis::new()
    .with_comprehensive_scheme(true)
    .with_congressional_intent(true)
    .with_traditionally_federal_domain(true);

let analysis = PreemptionAnalysis::new("Immigration and Nationality Act", "Arizona SB 1070")
    .with_field_analysis(field)
    .with_subject_matter("Immigration enforcement");

let result = analysis.analyze();
assert_eq!(result.preemption_type, PreemptionType::ImpliedField);
assert!(result.preempted);

Dormant Commerce Clause

use legalis_us::federal::{CommerceClauseAnalysis, DormantCommerceClauseTest};

// Discrimination test
let analysis = CommerceClauseAnalysis::new("NJ", "Prohibition on out-of-state waste imports")
    .with_discrimination("Explicitly prohibits out-of-state waste while allowing in-state waste")
    .with_subject_matter("Waste disposal");

let result = analysis.analyze();
assert_eq!(result.test, DormantCommerceClauseTest::Discrimination);
assert!(!result.valid); // Discriminatory laws are nearly per se invalid

// Pike balancing test
let analysis = CommerceClauseAnalysis::new("IL", "Inspection requirements for imported produce")
    .with_burden("Requires inspection of out-of-state produce")
    .with_local_benefit("Protects Illinois consumers from contaminated produce")
    .with_subject_matter("Food safety");

let result = analysis.analyze();
assert_eq!(result.test, DormantCommerceClauseTest::PikeBalancing);
assert!(result.valid); // Benefits may outweigh burdens

// Market participant exception
let analysis = CommerceClauseAnalysis::new("MD", "Preference for Maryland residents in state park jobs")
    .with_market_participant_exception()
    .with_subject_matter("State employment");

let result = analysis.analyze();
assert!(result.valid); // Exception applies

Preemption Types:

• Express Preemption: Explicit statutory language preempts state law
• Implied Field Preemption: Federal scheme so comprehensive it occupies entire field
• Implied Conflict Preemption: State law conflicts with federal law

Commerce Clause Tests:

• Discrimination Test: Strict scrutiny for laws favoring in-state commerce (nearly per se invalid)
• Pike Balancing Test: Burden vs. benefit analysis for non-discriminatory laws

8. Professional Licensing Across States

Track attorney, physician, and architect licensing requirements across all US jurisdictions:

Attorney Licensing (Bar Admission)

use legalis_us::professional_licensing::{ube_status, can_transfer_ube_score};

// Check UBE adoption status
let ny_status = ube_status("NY");
assert!(matches!(ny_status, UBEStatus::Adopted { minimum_score: 266, .. }));

// Check UBE score transferability
assert!(can_transfer_ube_score("NY", "CO", 280)); // 280 meets CO's 276 minimum
assert!(!can_transfer_ube_score("NY", "CA", 300)); // CA doesn't use UBE

Uniform Bar Examination (UBE):

• 40+ jurisdictions adopted UBE for portable bar scores
• Minimum scores vary: 260-280 points (out of 400)
• Notable non-UBE states: California, Louisiana, Florida, Nevada
• Score portability: Transfer UBE scores between member states

Medical Licensing (IMLC)

use legalis_us::professional_licensing::{is_imlc_member, telemedicine_requirements};

// Check Interstate Medical Licensure Compact membership
assert!(is_imlc_member("TX")); // Texas is a member
assert!(!is_imlc_member("CA")); // California is not

// Get telemedicine regulations
let tx_telemedicine = telemedicine_requirements("TX");
assert!(tx_telemedicine.special_telemedicine_license); // TX has special license
assert!(tx_telemedicine.initial_in_person_required); // TX requires in-person visit

Interstate Medical Licensure Compact (IMLC):

• 35+ member states expedite multi-state licensing
• Processing time: 30-90 days (vs. 6+ months traditional)
• Telemedicine rules: State-specific requirements for remote care
• Prescribing authority: Opioid limits and controlled substance regulations

Architect Licensing (NCARB)

use legalis_us::professional_licensing::{can_use_ncarb_certificate, ncarb_status};

// NCARB Certificate provides reciprocity in most states
assert!(can_use_ncarb_certificate("TX")); // Full reciprocity
assert!(can_use_ncarb_certificate("CA")); // Conditional (CSE required)

// Check NCARB reciprocity status
let ca_status = ncarb_status("CA");
// California requires California Supplemental Examination (CSE)

NCARB (National Council of Architectural Registration Boards):

• 54 jurisdictions recognize NCARB Certificate
• Reciprocal licensure: Streamlined application process
• State-specific exams: Some states require additional testing (CA, NY)
• Continuing education: Varies by state (12-40 hours per renewal period)

9. Tax Law Variations Across States

Comprehensive state-by-state tax analysis covering income, sales, and corporate taxation:

State Income Tax

use legalis_us::tax::income_tax::{has_state_income_tax, income_tax_structure, IncomeTaxType};

// Check if state has income tax
assert!(!has_state_income_tax("TX")); // Texas: no income tax
assert!(!has_state_income_tax("FL")); // Florida: no income tax
assert!(has_state_income_tax("CA"));  // California: progressive

// Get tax structure details
let ca_tax = income_tax_structure("CA");
if let IncomeTaxType::Progressive { top_rate, .. } = ca_tax.tax_type {
    assert_eq!(top_rate, 0.1330); // 13.3% - highest in US
}

// Flat tax states
let il_tax = income_tax_structure("IL");
assert!(matches!(il_tax.tax_type, IncomeTaxType::Flat { rate: 0.0495 }));

State Income Tax Patterns:

• 9 no-tax states: AK, FL, NV, SD, TN, TX, WA, WY, NH
• 9 flat-tax states: CO, IL, IN, KY, MA, MI, NC, PA, UT (rates: 3.07% - 5.00%)
• 33 progressive-tax states: Majority use graduated brackets
• Highest rate: California 13.3% (top bracket for income over $1M)
• Local income taxes: NYC (3.876%), Philadelphia (3.79%), and others

Sales Tax

use legalis_us::tax::sales_tax::{has_sales_tax, state_sales_tax_rate, post_wayfair_nexus};

// No sales tax states (5)
assert!(!has_sales_tax("OR")); // Oregon: no sales tax
assert!(!has_sales_tax("DE")); // Delaware: no sales tax

// Sales tax rates
let ca_tax = state_sales_tax_rate("CA");
assert_eq!(ca_tax.state_rate, 0.0725); // 7.25% - highest state rate
assert!(ca_tax.max_combined_rate.unwrap() > 0.10); // Up to 10.25% with locals

// Post-Wayfair economic nexus
let sd_nexus = post_wayfair_nexus("SD"); // South Dakota v. Wayfair origin
assert!(sd_nexus.marketplace_facilitator_law);

Sales Tax Patterns:

• 5 no-tax states: AK, DE, MT, NH, OR
• Lowest state rate: Colorado 2.9%
• Highest state rate: California 7.25%
• Highest combined: Louisiana avg 9.55% (state + local)
• Economic nexus: Most states use $100k sales or 200 transactions threshold
• Post-Wayfair: All states can require remote seller collection

Corporate Tax

use legalis_us::tax::corporate_tax::{corporate_tax_rate, is_tax_haven};

// Corporate tax havens
assert!(is_tax_haven("DE")); // Delaware: most corporations incorporate here
assert!(is_tax_haven("NV")); // Nevada: no corporate income tax
assert!(is_tax_haven("WY")); // Wyoming: no corporate income tax

// Tax rates
let nj_tax = corporate_tax_rate("NJ");
assert_eq!(nj_tax.tax_rate, 0.1150); // 11.5% - highest in US

let de_tax = corporate_tax_rate("DE");
assert_eq!(de_tax.tax_rate, 0.0885); // 8.85% but still tax haven

Corporate Tax Patterns:

• 6 no-corporate-tax states: NV, SD, WY, WA (B&O tax), TX (franchise tax), OH (CAT)
• Corporate tax havens: Delaware (Court of Chancery), Nevada, Wyoming
• Highest rate: New Jersey 11.5%
• Apportionment: Most states use single-factor sales formula
• Combined reporting: CA, NY, IL, MA, and 20+ others require it
• Delaware dominance: 60%+ of Fortune 500 companies incorporated there

10. Legislative Tracking (Phase 5)

Track policy adoption and constitutional provisions across all US states.

10.1 Policy Adoption Tracker

Track key policy areas across jurisdictions:

Cannabis Legalization:

use legalis_us::legislative::policy_tracker::{cannabis_status, CannabisStatus};

// Recreational states (25 including DC)
let ca = cannabis_status("CA");
assert_eq!(ca, CannabisStatus::RecreationalLegal { year_enacted: 2016 });

// Medical only states
let fl = cannabis_status("FL");
assert_eq!(fl, CannabisStatus::MedicalOnly { year_enacted: 2016 });

// Fully illegal states
let id = cannabis_status("ID");
assert_eq!(id, CannabisStatus::Illegal);

Data Privacy Laws:

use legalis_us::legislative::policy_tracker::{has_comprehensive_privacy_law, comprehensive_privacy_laws, DataPrivacyLaw};

// States with comprehensive privacy laws (17+ as of 2024)
assert!(has_comprehensive_privacy_law("CA")); // CCPA/CPRA (2018)
assert!(has_comprehensive_privacy_law("VA")); // VCDPA (2021)
assert!(has_comprehensive_privacy_law("CO")); // CPA (2021)
assert!(has_comprehensive_privacy_law("CT")); // CTDPA (2022)

let ca_laws = comprehensive_privacy_laws("CA");
assert_eq!(ca_laws.len(), 1);
assert!(matches!(ca_laws[0], DataPrivacyLaw::CCPA { enacted: 2018, cpra_enhanced: true }));

Right to Repair:

use legalis_us::legislative::policy_tracker::{right_to_repair_status, RightToRepairStatus};

// Massachusetts: Automotive right to repair (2012, expanded 2020)
let ma = right_to_repair_status("MA");
assert!(matches!(ma, RightToRepairStatus::Comprehensive { automotive: true, electronics: true, .. }));

// California: Electronics right to repair (SB 244, 2023)
let ca = right_to_repair_status("CA");
assert!(matches!(ca, RightToRepairStatus::Comprehensive { electronics: true, .. }));

Policy Patterns:

• Cannabis: 25 recreational (including DC), 16 medical-only, 2 decriminalized, 8 illegal
• Privacy Laws: 17+ states with comprehensive privacy laws (CA, VA, CO, CT, UT, MT, OR, TX, IA, TN, DE, FL, IN, KY, NE, NH, NJ)
• Right to Repair: 6 states (CA, CO, MA, MN, NY, OR)

10.2 Constitutional Provisions

Track state constitutional rights beyond federal minimums:

Constitutional Privacy Rights:

use legalis_us::legislative::constitutional::{constitutional_privacy_right, ConstitutionalPrivacyRight};

// States with explicit constitutional privacy rights (10 states)
let ca = constitutional_privacy_right("CA");
assert!(matches!(ca, ConstitutionalPrivacyRight::Explicit { year_adopted: 1972, .. }));

let fl = constitutional_privacy_right("FL");
assert!(matches!(fl, ConstitutionalPrivacyRight::Explicit { year_adopted: 1980, .. }));

// States with implicit privacy rights
let ny = constitutional_privacy_right("NY");
assert!(matches!(ny, ConstitutionalPrivacyRight::Implicit { .. }));

// No constitutional privacy right
let tx = constitutional_privacy_right("TX");
assert_eq!(tx, ConstitutionalPrivacyRight::None);

Initiative and Referendum:

use legalis_us::legislative::constitutional::{has_initiative_referendum, state_constitutional_provisions};

// States with citizen initiative/referendum (23 states)
assert!(has_initiative_referendum("CA")); // Yes (since 1911)
assert!(has_initiative_referendum("OR")); // Yes (since 1902 - pioneer)
assert!(!has_initiative_referendum("TX")); // No (legislative referral only)

// Detailed provisions
let ca_provisions = state_constitutional_provisions("CA");
assert!(ca_provisions.direct_democracy.signature_threshold.is_some());
assert!(!ca_provisions.direct_democracy.notable_measures.is_empty());
assert!(!ca_provisions.beyond_federal_floor.is_empty());

Constitutional Patterns:

• Explicit Privacy Rights: 10 states (AK, AZ, CA, FL, HI, IL, LA, MT, SC, WA)
• Citizen Initiative: 23 states (CA, OR, AZ, CO, etc. - Progressive Era reforms)
• Direct Democracy: Pioneered by Oregon (1902), South Dakota (1898)
• Notable Initiatives: CA Prop 13 (1978), CO Amendment 64 (2012 cannabis), MA Question 1 (2012 right to repair)
• Beyond Federal Floor: Many states provide broader protections than U.S. Constitution

Common Law vs Civil Law

The US legal system (derived from English Common Law) differs fundamentally from Civil Law systems (Japan, Germany, France):

Civil Law Approach (大陸法)

Legislature
    ↓
Code/Statute (e.g., 民法709条, BGB §823, Code civil 1240)
    ↓
Courts apply statute to cases

Common Law Approach (英米法)

Case 1 → Precedent A
    ↓
Case 2 cites Case 1 → Refines Precedent A
    ↓
Case 3 distinguishes → Exception to Precedent A
    ↓
Restatement synthesizes → § X: Rule A (non-binding)
    ↓
Case 4 adopts Restatement § X

Key Differences

Why This Matters for Legalis-RS

• Civil Law modeling uses Statute objects (e.g., 民法709条)
• Common Law modeling uses Case objects with precedent_weight()

The same tort concept appears differently:

• Civil Law: Article 709 (statute) → "intent OR negligence"
• Common Law: Palsgraf (case) → "duty to foreseeable plaintiff"

Louisiana: The Exception

Louisiana is the only US state using a Civil Law system (French heritage). This creates unique opportunities for cross-jurisdiction comparison:

use legalis_us::states::louisiana::LouisianaLaw;

let la = LouisianaLaw::default();

// Louisiana Civil Code Article 2315 vs Japan Minpo 709
let comparison = la.compare_with_minpo_709();
assert!(comparison.similarity > 0.70); // Both Civil Law tort provisions

// Louisiana vs France Code civil 1240
let comparison = la.compare_with_code_civil_1240();
assert!(comparison.similarity > 0.80); // French heritage

// Louisiana vs Germany BGB §823
let comparison = la.compare_with_bgb_823();
assert!(comparison.similarity > 0.70); // Civil Law similarities

State Jurisdiction Codes

States are identified using ISO 3166-2:US codes:

• Federal: "US"
• Restatement: "US-RESTATEMENT"
• State: "US-CA", "US-NY", "US-TX", "US-LA", "US-FL"

Module Organization

us/src/
├── lib.rs              # Public API and re-exports
├── cases.rs            # Landmark tort cases
├── restatement.rs      # ALI Restatement sections
│
├── states/             # State-specific laws
│   ├── types.rs        # Core data structures
│   ├── registry.rs     # State metadata
│   ├── comparator.rs   # State comparison engine
│   ├── california.rs
│   ├── new_york.rs
│   ├── texas.rs
│   ├── louisiana.rs
│   └── florida.rs
│
├── choice_of_law/      # Multi-state conflict resolution
│   ├── factors.rs      # US connecting factors
│   ├── restatement_first.rs
│   ├── restatement_second.rs
│   └── analyzer.rs
│
├── uniform_acts/       # UCC and UPA tracking
│   ├── ucc.rs
│   ├── upa.rs
│   └── adoption_status.rs
│
├── federal/            # Federal-state boundary
│   ├── preemption.rs
│   └── commerce_clause.rs
│
├── professional_licensing/  # Professional licensing across states
│   ├── types.rs             # Common licensing types
│   ├── bar_admission.rs     # Attorney licensing (UBE)
│   ├── medical.rs           # Physician licensing (IMLC)
│   └── architect.rs         # Architect licensing (NCARB)
│
├── tax/                     # State tax law variations
│   ├── mod.rs               # Tax module organization
│   ├── income_tax.rs        # State income tax (9 no-tax states)
│   ├── sales_tax.rs         # Sales tax & post-Wayfair nexus
│   └── corporate_tax.rs     # Corporate tax & tax havens
│
└── legislative/             # Policy adoption and constitutional provisions
    ├── mod.rs               # Legislative tracking module
    ├── policy_tracker.rs    # Cannabis, privacy, right to repair
    └── constitutional.rs    # State constitutional provisions

Testing

All features are comprehensively tested with 409 tests covering:

# Run all tests
cargo nextest run --all-features

# Run specific module tests
cargo test states::california
cargo test choice_of_law
cargo test federal::preemption

# Check for warnings (zero tolerance policy)
cargo clippy --all-features

Current Test Status: 166 tests passing, 0 warnings

Dependencies

• legalis-core - Core types and traits
• serde / serde_json - Serialization
• chrono - Date/time handling
• uuid - Unique identifiers

Future Phases

Phase 2: Remaining 45 States

• Tier 1: 8 major jurisdictions (IL, PA, OH, GA, MA, WA, MI, NJ)
• Tier 2: 10 regional representatives
• Tier 3: 27 remaining states

Phase 3: Professional Licensing

• Attorney licensing (UBE portability)
• Medical licensing (telemedicine interstate)
• Architect licensing (NCARB)

Phase 4: Tax Variations

• State income tax comparison
• Sales tax nexus analysis
• Corporate tax comparison

Phase 5: Legislative Tracking

• Cannabis legalization status
• Data privacy laws (CCPA, SHIELD Act, etc.)
• Right to repair laws

Contributing

See the main Legalis-RS repository for contribution guidelines.

License

MIT OR Apache-2.0

Links

• American Law Institute
• Uniform Law Commission
• GitHub: cool-japan/legalis