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 July 23, 2024
Updated July 3, 2024
Ongoing
Updated June 26, 2024
Ongoing
Updated June 14, 2024
Featured
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: Ongoing
View case
Ohio
May 2024
![Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.](https://wp.api.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
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2024
![South Carolina](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/05/SC-2-600x400.jpg)
Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (Congressional Map Challenge)
South Carolina unlawfully assigned voters to congressional districts based on their race and intentionally discriminated against Black voters in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 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
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://wp.api.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
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
![City of Grants Pass v. Johnson](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson
Status: Ongoing
View case
Montana Supreme Court
Mar 2024
![MT](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2021/05/MT.jpg)
Western Native Voice v. Jacobsen
The American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Montana, Native American Rights Fund (NARF), and the Harvard Election Law Clinic challenged two Montana laws that hinder Native American participation in the state’s electoral process — HB 530, which prohibited paid third-party ballot collection; and HB 176, which repealed Election Day voter registration (EDR) in Montana. Together, these laws violate a number of provisions in the Montana Constitution: the right to vote, equal protection, free speech, and due process.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
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
1,444 Court Cases
Wisconsin
Apr 2017
![Trans Flag](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB17-TransFlag-SocialShare-1200x628-600x314.png)
Boyden v. State of Wisconsin
Alina Boyden and Shannon Andrews, two state employees who are transgender filed a lawsuit against the State of Wisconsin. The case challenges the state’s categorical ban on coverage for certain types of necessary medical care for persons who are transgender under federal law and the Constitution.
Status: Closed
View case
![Trans Flag](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB17-TransFlag-SocialShare-1200x628-600x314.png)
Wisconsin
LGBTQ Rights
Boyden v. State of Wisconsin
Alina Boyden and Shannon Andrews, two state employees who are transgender filed a lawsuit against the State of Wisconsin. The case challenges the state’s categorical ban on coverage for certain types of necessary medical care for persons who are transgender under federal law and the Constitution.
Apr 2017
Status: Closed
View case
Mar 2017
![Adkins et al. vs. Morgan Stanley](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Adkins et al. vs. Morgan Stanley
The ACLU, along with the National Consumer Law Center and the law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, has filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Manhattan to hold Morgan Stanley accountable for its collaboration with the subprime lender New Century, which supplied Morgan Stanley with a steady stream of irresponsible, high-risk loans issued in communities of color that were particularly vulnerable to economic ruin. Although practices like these inflicted damages in low and middle-income communities across the nation, Detroit was particularly vulnerable.
View case
![Adkins et al. vs. Morgan Stanley](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Racial Justice
Adkins et al. vs. Morgan Stanley
The ACLU, along with the National Consumer Law Center and the law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, has filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Manhattan to hold Morgan Stanley accountable for its collaboration with the subprime lender New Century, which supplied Morgan Stanley with a steady stream of irresponsible, high-risk loans issued in communities of color that were particularly vulnerable to economic ruin. Although practices like these inflicted damages in low and middle-income communities across the nation, Detroit was particularly vulnerable.
Mar 2017
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 2017
![Moore v. Texas](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Moore v. Texas
Whether Texas is violating the Constitution by using a test to determine intellectual disability in death penalty cases that is inconsistent with both Supreme Court precedent and science.
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
![Moore v. Texas](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Capital Punishment
Moore v. Texas
Whether Texas is violating the Constitution by using a test to determine intellectual disability in death penalty cases that is inconsistent with both Supreme Court precedent and science.
Mar 2017
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
Mar 2017
![iachr photo of empty table](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/iachr photo of empty table-600x400.jpg)
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Hearing on Trump's Executive Orders
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights is meeting in Washington, D.C., for a regular session covering human rights issues in North and South America. This session, the Commission will be holding, at its own initiative, a hearing on the human rights implications of President Trump’s executive orders on the Muslim and refugee ban, immigration enforcement and detention, and the approval of the Dakota Access Pipeline. 6 groups were invited to present testimony including the ACLU.
View case
![iachr photo of empty table](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/iachr photo of empty table-600x400.jpg)
Immigrants' Rights
Human Rights
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Hearing on Trump's Executive Orders
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights is meeting in Washington, D.C., for a regular session covering human rights issues in North and South America. This session, the Commission will be holding, at its own initiative, a hearing on the human rights implications of President Trump’s executive orders on the Muslim and refugee ban, immigration enforcement and detention, and the approval of the Dakota Access Pipeline. 6 groups were invited to present testimony including the ACLU.
Mar 2017
View case
Missouri
Mar 2017
![Shondel Church, et al. v. State of Missouri, et al.](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Shondel Church, et al. v. State of Missouri, et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Missouri, along with the MacArthur Justice Center, and the law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, filed a class action lawsuit against the State of Missouri over its public defender office’s inability to provide adequate defense to poor people accused of crimes across the state, as required under the U.S. and Missouri Constitutions.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Shondel Church, et al. v. State of Missouri, et al.](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Missouri
Criminal Law Reform
Shondel Church, et al. v. State of Missouri, et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Missouri, along with the MacArthur Justice Center, and the law firm of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, filed a class action lawsuit against the State of Missouri over its public defender office’s inability to provide adequate defense to poor people accused of crimes across the state, as required under the U.S. and Missouri Constitutions.
Mar 2017
Status: Ongoing
View case