Race and Criminal Justice
Fund for Empowerment v. Phoenix, City of
Fund for Empowerment is a challenge to the City of Phoenix’s practice of conducting sweeps of encampments without notice, issuing citations to unsheltered people for camping and sleeping on public property when they have no place else to go, and confiscating and destroying their property without notice or process.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Learn About Race and Criminal Justice
Featured
Jun 2020
![Defy Ventures, Inc. v. Small Business Administration](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Defy Ventures, Inc. v. Small Business Administration
Suing the Trump administration to lift its unlawful exclusion of businesses owned by people with criminal records from being eligible for Paycheck Protection Act funds
Status: Ongoing
View case
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
All Cases
17 Race and Criminal Justice Cases
Iowa
Feb 2024
![State of Iowa v. Lawrence George Canady III](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
State of Iowa v. Lawrence George Canady III
In this case, the Iowa Supreme Court considered when rap lyrics are admissible evidence in criminal trials. The State sought further review of a court of appeals decision which reversed the defendant's criminal convictions and remanded for a trial based on errors in the admission of evidence. Together with the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project and the ACLU of Iowa, the State Supreme Court Initiative filed an amicus brief arguing that such evidence should usually be excluded because it is rarely probative and yet creates a high risk of prejudice to the defendant. The Court ultimately reversed the court of appeals conviction, although somewhat attempted to limit the admission of the rap video to the facts of the case.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![State of Iowa v. Lawrence George Canady III](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Iowa
Race and Criminal Justice
Racial Justice
State of Iowa v. Lawrence George Canady III
In this case, the Iowa Supreme Court considered when rap lyrics are admissible evidence in criminal trials. The State sought further review of a court of appeals decision which reversed the defendant's criminal convictions and remanded for a trial based on errors in the admission of evidence. Together with the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project and the ACLU of Iowa, the State Supreme Court Initiative filed an amicus brief arguing that such evidence should usually be excluded because it is rarely probative and yet creates a high risk of prejudice to the defendant. The Court ultimately reversed the court of appeals conviction, although somewhat attempted to limit the admission of the rap video to the facts of the case.
Feb 2024
Status: Ongoing
View case
Michigan
Jan 2024
![Robert Williams](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2020/06/WEB20-Robert-Williams-WordPress-1110x740-1-600x400.jpg)
Williams v. City of Detroit
This case seeks to hold Detroit police accountable for the wrongful arrest of our client due to officers’ reliance on a false match from face recognition technology.
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
![Robert Williams](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2020/06/WEB20-Robert-Williams-WordPress-1110x740-1-600x400.jpg)
Michigan
Race and Criminal Justice
+2 Issues
Williams v. City of Detroit
This case seeks to hold Detroit police accountable for the wrongful arrest of our client due to officers’ reliance on a false match from face recognition technology.
Jan 2024
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
South Carolina
Mar 2023
![Cayeshia Johnson](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2022/05/WEB17_Cayeshia-Johnson-600x400.jpg)
Brown v. Lexington County, et al
This case is part of a nationwide fight against criminalization of poverty and, specifically, debtors' prisons. On June 1, 2017, the ACLU's Racial Justice Program, the ACLU of South Carolina, and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC filed a federal lawsuit challenging the illegal arrest and incarceration of indigent people in Lexington County, South Carolina, for failure to pay fines and fees, without determining willfulness or providing assistance to counsel. Those targeted by this long-standing practice could avoid jail only if they paid the entire amount of outstanding court fines and fees up front and in full. Indigent people who were unable to pay were incarcerated for weeks to months without ever seeing a judge, having a court hearing, or receiving help from a lawyer. The result was one of the most draconian debtors’ prisons uncovered by the ACLU since 2010.
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
![Cayeshia Johnson](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2022/05/WEB17_Cayeshia-Johnson-600x400.jpg)
South Carolina
Race and Criminal Justice
Racial Justice
Brown v. Lexington County, et al
This case is part of a nationwide fight against criminalization of poverty and, specifically, debtors' prisons. On June 1, 2017, the ACLU's Racial Justice Program, the ACLU of South Carolina, and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC filed a federal lawsuit challenging the illegal arrest and incarceration of indigent people in Lexington County, South Carolina, for failure to pay fines and fees, without determining willfulness or providing assistance to counsel. Those targeted by this long-standing practice could avoid jail only if they paid the entire amount of outstanding court fines and fees up front and in full. Indigent people who were unable to pay were incarcerated for weeks to months without ever seeing a judge, having a court hearing, or receiving help from a lawyer. The result was one of the most draconian debtors’ prisons uncovered by the ACLU since 2010.
Mar 2023
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
South Carolina
Feb 2023
![Niya in front of school](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/Niya-in-front-of-school-1160x864-v0-600x447.jpg)
CYAP v. Wilson
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s “disturbing schools” and “disorderly conduct” laws. The laws allowed students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined “obnoxious” actions on school grounds and encouraged discriminatory enforcement against Black students and students with disabilities. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling that enforcing these laws against students was unconstitutional, affirming that subjecting students to criminal penalties under such vague rules interferes with their education and their future, and produces stark racial disparities. This decision should be instructive to the many school districts across the country where students continue to be charged with ‘disorderly conduct’ and similar vague crimes.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Niya in front of school](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/Niya-in-front-of-school-1160x864-v0-600x447.jpg)
South Carolina
Race and Criminal Justice
+2 Issues
CYAP v. Wilson
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s “disturbing schools” and “disorderly conduct” laws. The laws allowed students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined “obnoxious” actions on school grounds and encouraged discriminatory enforcement against Black students and students with disabilities. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling that enforcing these laws against students was unconstitutional, affirming that subjecting students to criminal penalties under such vague rules interferes with their education and their future, and produces stark racial disparities. This decision should be instructive to the many school districts across the country where students continue to be charged with ‘disorderly conduct’ and similar vague crimes.
Feb 2023
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
North Carolina
Mar 2022
![Seti Johnson](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB18-SetiJohnson1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Johnson v. Jessup
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of North Carolina, Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and Southern Coalition for Social Justice are suing the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for indefinitely revoking driver’s licenses of people who cannot afford to pay traffic tickets. North Carolina’s wealth-based license revocation system impacts hundreds of thousands of people each year, preventing them from driving legally to support themselves and their families. This system funnels people unable to pay traffic tickets, particularly people of color, into cycles of debt, traffic violations, and poverty in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s promises of due process and equal protection under the law.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Seti Johnson](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB18-SetiJohnson1160x864-600x447.jpg)
North Carolina
Race and Criminal Justice
Racial Justice
Johnson v. Jessup
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU of North Carolina, Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and Southern Coalition for Social Justice are suing the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) for indefinitely revoking driver’s licenses of people who cannot afford to pay traffic tickets. North Carolina’s wealth-based license revocation system impacts hundreds of thousands of people each year, preventing them from driving legally to support themselves and their families. This system funnels people unable to pay traffic tickets, particularly people of color, into cycles of debt, traffic violations, and poverty in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s promises of due process and equal protection under the law.
Mar 2022
Status: Ongoing
View case