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
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
![Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al
After the Washington Supreme Court found that the refusal of Arlene’s Flowers to sell flowers to a gay couple violated Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, the flower shop sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. The US Supreme Court subsequently remanded to the WA Supreme Court and on June 6, 2019, the WA Supreme Court affirmed their earlier decision. On September 11, 2019, Arlene's Flowers filed to hear the case again, at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Status: Closed (Dismissed)
View case
![Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
LGBTQ Rights
Religious Liberty
Arlene's Flowers et al v. Washington et al
After the Washington Supreme Court found that the refusal of Arlene’s Flowers to sell flowers to a gay couple violated Washington Law Against Discrimination and the Consumer Protection Act, the flower shop sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. The US Supreme Court subsequently remanded to the WA Supreme Court and on June 6, 2019, the WA Supreme Court affirmed their earlier decision. On September 11, 2019, Arlene's Flowers filed to hear the case again, at the Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 2021
Status: Closed (Dismissed)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
![CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Doe](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Doe
Whether Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act creates a private cause of action for disparate impact claims.
Status: Closed (Voluntarily Dismissed)
View case
![CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Doe](https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Disability Rights
CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Doe
Whether Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act creates a private cause of action for disparate impact claims.
Nov 2021
Status: Closed (Voluntarily Dismissed)
View case
Ohio
Nov 2021
![Demonstrators outside the Supreme Court carrying signs advocating for LGBTQ rights](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB19-Trans-People-Belong-Sign-BlogImage-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Ray v. McCloud
On March 29, 2018, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, and Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit challenging Ohio’s refusal to correct the gender marker on birth certificates for transgender people, for any reason, at any time. Ohio is one of just three states, with Tennessee and Kansas, that has yet to change the extremely regressive and harmful policy. The lawsuit states that the Ohio government has violated the equal protection, due process, and free speech rights of Stacie Ray, Basil Argento, Ashley Breda, and a fourth, unnamed plaintiff.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Demonstrators outside the Supreme Court carrying signs advocating for LGBTQ rights](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB19-Trans-People-Belong-Sign-BlogImage-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Ohio
LGBTQ Rights
Ray v. McCloud
On March 29, 2018, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, and Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit challenging Ohio’s refusal to correct the gender marker on birth certificates for transgender people, for any reason, at any time. Ohio is one of just three states, with Tennessee and Kansas, that has yet to change the extremely regressive and harmful policy. The lawsuit states that the Ohio government has violated the equal protection, due process, and free speech rights of Stacie Ray, Basil Argento, Ashley Breda, and a fourth, unnamed plaintiff.
Nov 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
![Paige and Shannon](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web18-paigeshannon-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Fulton v. City of Philadelphia
On November 4, the Supreme Court heard a case that could allow private agencies that receive taxpayer-funding to provide government services — such as foster care providers, food banks, homeless shelters, and more — to deny services to people who are LGBTQ, Jewish, Muslim, or Mormon.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Paige and Shannon](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web18-paigeshannon-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
LGBTQ Rights
Fulton v. City of Philadelphia
On November 4, the Supreme Court heard a case that could allow private agencies that receive taxpayer-funding to provide government services — such as foster care providers, food banks, homeless shelters, and more — to deny services to people who are LGBTQ, Jewish, Muslim, or Mormon.
Nov 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
Mississippi
Nov 2021
![Abraham House of God](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/11/Abraham-House-of-God-Horn-Lake-MS_Front-600x382.png)
ABRAHAM HOUSE OF GOD V. CITY OF HORN LAKE
Horn Lake officials unlawfully denied zoning approval for a proposed mosque due to anti-Muslim bias, according to a federal lawsuit filed in November 2021 by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Mississippi, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP. Just before holding a vote on the mosque’s site plan, one Horn Lake Alderman ominously warned, “if you let them build it, they will come” and encouraged his fellow board members to “stop it before it gets here.”
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
![Abraham House of God](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/11/Abraham-House-of-God-Horn-Lake-MS_Front-600x382.png)
Mississippi
Religious Liberty
ABRAHAM HOUSE OF GOD V. CITY OF HORN LAKE
Horn Lake officials unlawfully denied zoning approval for a proposed mosque due to anti-Muslim bias, according to a federal lawsuit filed in November 2021 by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Mississippi, and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP. Just before holding a vote on the mosque’s site plan, one Horn Lake Alderman ominously warned, “if you let them build it, they will come” and encouraged his fellow board members to “stop it before it gets here.”
Nov 2021
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case