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 June 26, 2024
Ongoing
Updated June 14, 2024
Ongoing
Updated June 14, 2024
Ongoing
Updated May 23, 2024
Featured
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
Florida
Mar 2024
![VT](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/02/section_civic_engagement.jpg)
Hispanic Federation v. Byrd
Of all 50 states, Florida ranks 47th in percentage of its eligible citizens who are registered to vote. Yet, in May 2023, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed SB 7050, which bars any noncitizen — regardless of lawful residence status — from working or volunteering for third-party voter registration organizations (3PVROs) who register eligible Floridians to vote. In practice, the law imposes a $50,000 fine on a 3PVRO for each noncitizen who engages in voter-registration work on a 3PVRO’s behalf. This law would silence and put out of business countless community-based groups that rely on both citizens and noncitizens to help eligible voters in their communities participate in their democracy.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2023
![Outside Federal Bureau of Investigation Headquarters](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/10/web19-fbi-building-kristi-blokhin-shutterstock.com-blogimage-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
FBI v. Fikre
Whether the government can overcome the voluntary cessation exception to mootness by removing an individual from the No Fly List when the government has not repudiated its decision to place him on the List and remains free to return him to the List for the same reasons and using the same procedures he alleges were unlawful.
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
1,439 Court Cases
Tennessee
Oct 2023
![OUTMemphis v. Lee](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
OUTMemphis v. Lee
OUTMemphis v. Lee is a first-of-its-kind challenge to a state-level HIV criminalization law as a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Constitution. Plaintiffs OUTMemphis and Jane Does 1-4 seek to strike down Tennessee’s discriminatory, irrational and cruel enforcement of its “Aggravated Prostitution” law and related sex offender registration requirements.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![OUTMemphis v. Lee](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Tennessee
LGBTQ Rights
+3 Issues
OUTMemphis v. Lee
OUTMemphis v. Lee is a first-of-its-kind challenge to a state-level HIV criminalization law as a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Constitution. Plaintiffs OUTMemphis and Jane Does 1-4 seek to strike down Tennessee’s discriminatory, irrational and cruel enforcement of its “Aggravated Prostitution” law and related sex offender registration requirements.
Oct 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
Southern California
Oct 2023
![Muslim Ban Sign](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web18-muslimbansignjfk-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Wagafe v. USCIS - Lawsuit Challenging Secret Program Blocking Immigrant Applications
The ACLU and its affiliates in Southern California and Washington, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, the Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin, and Perkins Coie LLP filed a class action lawsuit in January 2017 challenging a federal government program used to deny or indefinitely delay thousands of law-abiding people—many of them from Muslim-majority countries—from becoming citizens or lawful residents due to unspecified “national security concerns.”
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Muslim Ban Sign](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web18-muslimbansignjfk-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Southern California
National Security
Wagafe v. USCIS - Lawsuit Challenging Secret Program Blocking Immigrant Applications
The ACLU and its affiliates in Southern California and Washington, the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, the Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin, and Perkins Coie LLP filed a class action lawsuit in January 2017 challenging a federal government program used to deny or indefinitely delay thousands of law-abiding people—many of them from Muslim-majority countries—from becoming citizens or lawful residents due to unspecified “national security concerns.”
Oct 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
Northern California
Oct 2023
![Sacramento Homeless Union v. City of Sacramento](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Sacramento Homeless Union v. City of Sacramento
The ACLU, along with the Northern and Southern California affiliates and four other organizations, filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting affirmance of a preliminary injunction that prevented the City of Sacramento from clearing homeless encampments during periods of extreme heat.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Sacramento Homeless Union v. City of Sacramento](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Northern California
Criminal Law Reform
Racial Justice
Sacramento Homeless Union v. City of Sacramento
The ACLU, along with the Northern and Southern California affiliates and four other organizations, filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting affirmance of a preliminary injunction that prevented the City of Sacramento from clearing homeless encampments during periods of extreme heat.
Oct 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
Oct 2023
![Detention facility in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web19-guantanamo-bay-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Connell v. CIA – FOIA Lawsuit Seeking Records About CIA “Operational Control” Over a Detention Facility at Guantánamo Bay
The CIA has refused to disclose whether it has records about its operational control over Camp VII, a detention facility at Guantánamo Bay. Given the extensive public record about the CIA’s connection to Camp VII, its refusal to acknowledge that it has responsive records both violates the law and defies common sense. At stake is whether the court will reject the CIA’s version of official secrecy and call out its fiction of deniability or whether it will allow that fiction to stand.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Detention facility in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web19-guantanamo-bay-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
National Security
Connell v. CIA – FOIA Lawsuit Seeking Records About CIA “Operational Control” Over a Detention Facility at Guantánamo Bay
The CIA has refused to disclose whether it has records about its operational control over Camp VII, a detention facility at Guantánamo Bay. Given the extensive public record about the CIA’s connection to Camp VII, its refusal to acknowledge that it has responsive records both violates the law and defies common sense. At stake is whether the court will reject the CIA’s version of official secrecy and call out its fiction of deniability or whether it will allow that fiction to stand.
Oct 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
Oct 2023
![Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
This case concerns whether the SEC, by approving the board diversity rule of the private securities exchange Nasdaq, violated provisions of federal law or the Constitution. Because a self-regulated private actor’s rule does not constitute state action and the board diversity rule was well-supported, it did not.
View case
![Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Free Speech
Alliance for Fair Board Recruitment v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
This case concerns whether the SEC, by approving the board diversity rule of the private securities exchange Nasdaq, violated provisions of federal law or the Constitution. Because a self-regulated private actor’s rule does not constitute state action and the board diversity rule was well-supported, it did not.
Oct 2023
View case