Civil Liberties
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2020

Civil Liberties
Trump v. Vance
Whether President Trump should comply with a grandy jury subpoena and hand over his personal finance documents.
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
15 Civil Liberties Cases

Washington, D.C.
Apr 2025
Civil Liberties
ACLU v. Social Security Administration (FOIA)
The ACLU seeks expedited processing of FOIA requests it submitted to the Social Security Administration and Department of Veterans Affairs requesting records regarding access to Americans’ health, financial, and other sensitive personal information by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.
Explore case
Washington, D.C.
Apr 2025

Civil Liberties
ACLU v. Social Security Administration (FOIA)
The ACLU seeks expedited processing of FOIA requests it submitted to the Social Security Administration and Department of Veterans Affairs requesting records regarding access to Americans’ health, financial, and other sensitive personal information by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

Court Case
Apr 2025
Civil Liberties
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP v. Executive Office of the President
Explore case
Court Case
Apr 2025

Civil Liberties
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP v. Executive Office of the President

Court Case
Apr 2025
Civil Liberties
Jenner & Block LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice
Explore case
Court Case
Apr 2025

Civil Liberties
Jenner & Block LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice

Montana
Apr 2025
Civil Liberties
LGBTQ Rights
Perkins et al. v. State (HB 121)
A newly enacted Montana law, HB 121, bars transgender and intersex people from using restrooms and other sex-separated facilities that correspond to their gender identity in public spaces. In doing so, HB 121 seeks to undermine transgender and intersex people’s personhood and ability to participate in public life. Together with the ACLU of Montana and Legal Voice, the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative filed this lawsuit on behalf of a group of transgender and intersex Montanans challenging HB 121 as violating numerous provisions of the Montana Constitution.
Explore case
Montana
Apr 2025

Civil Liberties
LGBTQ Rights
Perkins et al. v. State (HB 121)
A newly enacted Montana law, HB 121, bars transgender and intersex people from using restrooms and other sex-separated facilities that correspond to their gender identity in public spaces. In doing so, HB 121 seeks to undermine transgender and intersex people’s personhood and ability to participate in public life. Together with the ACLU of Montana and Legal Voice, the ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative filed this lawsuit on behalf of a group of transgender and intersex Montanans challenging HB 121 as violating numerous provisions of the Montana Constitution.

Montana Supreme Court
Feb 2025
Civil Liberties
+2 Issues
City of Kalispell v. Doman
This case asks whether the state can arrest, charge, and convict someone under Montana’s obstruction statute for exercising their federal and state constitutional right to record police officers in public spaces. The defendant was filming a traffic stop when police instructed him to move farther away. When he did not move as far as they wanted, they arrested him for obstructing a peace officer. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant arguing that the officer’s refusal to allow the defendant to peacefully record police activity from a public sidewalk was, in effect, a content-based restriction on speech that could not be justified under strict scrutiny. Even if the restriction was not content-based, our brief argues that it is not a reasonable time place or manner restriction.
Explore case
Montana Supreme Court
Feb 2025

Civil Liberties
+2 Issues
City of Kalispell v. Doman
This case asks whether the state can arrest, charge, and convict someone under Montana’s obstruction statute for exercising their federal and state constitutional right to record police officers in public spaces. The defendant was filming a traffic stop when police instructed him to move farther away. When he did not move as far as they wanted, they arrested him for obstructing a peace officer. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, along with the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief in support of the defendant arguing that the officer’s refusal to allow the defendant to peacefully record police activity from a public sidewalk was, in effect, a content-based restriction on speech that could not be justified under strict scrutiny. Even if the restriction was not content-based, our brief argues that it is not a reasonable time place or manner restriction.