Supreme Court Term 2023-2024
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated August 19, 2024
Ongoing
Updated August 12, 2024
Closed (Judgment)
Updated August 9, 2024
Ongoing
Updated July 30, 2024
Featured
Minnesota Supreme Court
Aug 2024
![Minnesota](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/04/Minnesota.jpg)
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Hunt
The ACLU and ACLU of Minnesota intervened as defendants to block an attempt by Minnesota Voters Alliance -- a private plaintiff group -- to challenge a law that restored voting rights to individuals convicted of a felony while they are "not incarcerated for the offense" and "including any period when they are on work release."
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2024
![Louisiana](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/Depositphotos_466919260_S-600x400.jpg)
Callais v. Landry
Whether the congressional map Louisiana adopted to cure a Voting Rights Act violation in Robinson v. Ardoin is itself unlawful as a gerrymander.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Nebraska Supreme Court
Jul 2024
![Nebraska vote](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/07/Vote-Nebraska-600x400.jpg)
Spung v. Evnen
Less than four months before the November 2024 presidential election, the Nebraska Secretary of State issued a directive embracing a non-binding opinion issued by the state Attorney General that would essentially reinstate permanent felony disenfranchisement and re-disenfranchise tens of thousands of Nebraska citizens. This directive is violative of both the Nebraska Constitution and several state statutes, and urgent relief is needed to avoid mass disenfranchisement of an entire class of Nebraska citizens.
Status: Ongoing
View case
South Carolina Supreme Court
Jul 2024
![South CArolina Supreme](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/07/GQStblrWIAAVtQW-600x315.jpg)
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
This case involves a state constitutional challenge to South Carolina’s 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state’s federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state’s Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Ohio
Jul 2024
![dis](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/disability-600x400.jpg)
League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose
In Ohio, HB 458 makes it a felony for any person who is not an election official or mail carrier to return an absentee voter's ballot—including voters with disabilities—unless the person assisting falls within an unduly narrow list of relatives. We are challenging the law because it violates Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) by making it exceedingly difficult for voters with disabilities to cast their ballots.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Mississippi
Jul 2024
![Mississippi](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/02/MS-Redistricting-Maps-Header-600x400.jpg)
Mississippi State Conference of the NAACP v. State Board of Election Commissioners
Mississippi has a growing Black population, which is already the largest Black population percentage of any state in the country. Yet. Black Mississippians continue to be significantly under-represented in the state legislature, as Mississippi’s latest districting maps fail to reflect the reality of the state’s changing demographics. During the 2022 redistricting process, the Mississippi legislature refused to create any new districts where Black voters have a chance to elect their preferred representative. The current district lines therefore dilute the voting power of Black Mississippians and continue to deprive them of political representation that is responsive to their needs and concerns, including severe disparities in education and healthcare.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
Ohio
May 2024
![Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the law firm WilmerHale, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm, on behalf of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Preterm-Cleveland, Women’s Med Group Professional Corporation, Dr. Sharon Liner, and Julia Quinn, MSN, BSN, amended a complaint in an existing lawsuit against a ban on telehealth medication abortion services to bring new claims under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment, including additional challenges to other laws in Ohio that restrict access to medication abortion in the state.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Texas
Apr 2024
![Crystal Mason](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/Crystal_Mason_1160x650-600x336.png)
Crystal Mason v. State of Texas
Crystal Mason thought she was performing her civic duty by filling out a provisional ballot in the 2016 election. She didn't know it would land her a five-year prison sentence, upending her family and the life she had built. At the time, Ms. Mason was on federal supervised release, a preliminary period of freedom for individuals who have served their full time of incarceration in federal prison. Ms. Mason didn’t know, and nobody told her, that the state considered her ineligible to vote while on supervised release. Because her name didn’t appear on voter rolls, she filed a provisional ballot, consistent with federal law. The state never counted her ballot but has still sought to send her to prison for an innocent mistake.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
![Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Idaho politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute — the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) — and put doctors in jail for providing pregnant patients necessary emergency medical care. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case on April 24, 2024. The Court’s ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
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
1,452 Court Cases
Florida
May 2018
![Williamson, et al. v. Brevard County](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Williamson, et al. v. Brevard County
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Florida, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a federal lawsuit challenging Brevard County's policy of excluding nontheists from offering pre-meeting invocations.
View case
![Williamson, et al. v. Brevard County](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Florida
Religious Liberty
Williamson, et al. v. Brevard County
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Florida, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a federal lawsuit challenging Brevard County's policy of excluding nontheists from offering pre-meeting invocations.
May 2018
View case
May 2018
![Woman holding "Abortion Access" poster at rally](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web16-blog-scotusrepro-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association v. Azar
The ACLU filed a lawsuit on behalf of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) challenging the Trump administration’s attempt to fundamentally alter the Title X family planning program, which provides care to 4 million low-income people each year. The administration is attempting to undermine access to high-quality preventive health services for low-income people by diverting funds from experienced family planning providers instead prioritizing entities that attempt to convince individuals, regardless of age, that they should not have sex outside of marriage.
View case
![Woman holding "Abortion Access" poster at rally](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web16-blog-scotusrepro-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Reproductive Freedom
National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association v. Azar
The ACLU filed a lawsuit on behalf of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) challenging the Trump administration’s attempt to fundamentally alter the Title X family planning program, which provides care to 4 million low-income people each year. The administration is attempting to undermine access to high-quality preventive health services for low-income people by diverting funds from experienced family planning providers instead prioritizing entities that attempt to convince individuals, regardless of age, that they should not have sex outside of marriage.
May 2018
View case
Apr 2018
![Dress code](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web17-lizzymartinez-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Lizzy Martinez v. Manatee County School District
On April 30, 2018, the ACLU Women’s Rights Project and ACLU of Florida sent a letter to the Manatee County School District and the principal of Braden River High School on behalf of Lizzy Martinez, a high school student disciplined for not wearing a bra under her shirt to school due to a painful sunburn.
View case
![Dress code](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web17-lizzymartinez-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Women's Rights
Lizzy Martinez v. Manatee County School District
On April 30, 2018, the ACLU Women’s Rights Project and ACLU of Florida sent a letter to the Manatee County School District and the principal of Braden River High School on behalf of Lizzy Martinez, a high school student disciplined for not wearing a bra under her shirt to school due to a painful sunburn.
Apr 2018
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2018
![Hester v. Gentry](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Hester v. Gentry
In Alabama’s criminal justice system, wealth can be synonymous with freedom, and lack of wealth can mean incarceration. That’s wealth-based justice, and it’s unconstitutional. Hundreds of defendants, including Bradley Hester, Ray Charles Schultz, and Randall Parris, are routinely jailed pretrial due to their inability to afford a predetermined bail bond required for release. This system disregards the ramifications of unconstitutional pretrial detention for individuals and families, which include presumption of innocence, economic and emotional hardship, and potential loss of one’s job. We along with partners intervened in a federal class action lawsuit which seeks to end this unlawful detention scheme, and calls on Cullman County to instead implement fair, efficient, alternative conditions of release that are not based on how much money someone has.
Status: Closed
View case
![Hester v. Gentry](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Hester v. Gentry
In Alabama’s criminal justice system, wealth can be synonymous with freedom, and lack of wealth can mean incarceration. That’s wealth-based justice, and it’s unconstitutional. Hundreds of defendants, including Bradley Hester, Ray Charles Schultz, and Randall Parris, are routinely jailed pretrial due to their inability to afford a predetermined bail bond required for release. This system disregards the ramifications of unconstitutional pretrial detention for individuals and families, which include presumption of innocence, economic and emotional hardship, and potential loss of one’s job. We along with partners intervened in a federal class action lawsuit which seeks to end this unlawful detention scheme, and calls on Cullman County to instead implement fair, efficient, alternative conditions of release that are not based on how much money someone has.
Apr 2018
Status: Closed
View case
Indiana
Apr 2018
![Doctor with hand extended blocking the way](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB17-aca-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky v. Commissioner, Indiana State Department of Health
In April 2018, the ACLU, the ACLU of Indiana and Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK) filed a federal lawsuit challenging a state law passed in 2018 that requires health providers to submit a report to the state when a woman who has had an abortion seeks treatment for a wide range of health conditions. Physicians who fail to submit these reports would face criminal penalties and possible jail time.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Doctor with hand extended blocking the way](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB17-aca-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Indiana
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky v. Commissioner, Indiana State Department of Health
In April 2018, the ACLU, the ACLU of Indiana and Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK) filed a federal lawsuit challenging a state law passed in 2018 that requires health providers to submit a report to the state when a woman who has had an abortion seeks treatment for a wide range of health conditions. Physicians who fail to submit these reports would face criminal penalties and possible jail time.
Apr 2018
Status: Ongoing
View case