California
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the ACLU of Northern California, and the ACLU of Southern California filed amicus briefs in support of everyday people fighting for government transparency and accountability in two cases set for review by the U.S. Supreme Court this Term: O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Visit ACLU of Southern California
Visit ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties
Visit ACLU of Northern California
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
![FBI v. Fazaga Plaintiffs](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/Fazaga_scotus-1-Blog-600x400.jpg)
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU of Southern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2023
![O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the ACLU of Northern California, and the ACLU of Southern California filed amicus briefs in support of everyday people fighting for government transparency and accountability in two cases set for review by the U.S. Supreme Court this Term: O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021
![Border Asylum Line](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web19-asylumlinebarbedwire-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf
The American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s new policy forcing asylum seekers to return to Mexico and remain there while their cases are considered.
Status: Ongoing
View case
California
Mar 2019
![Protester holding "#Black Lives Matter" sign](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/web19-blm-rally-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
MediaJustice, et al. v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, et al.
On March 21, 2019, the American Civil Liberties Union and MediaJustice, formerly known as “Center for Media Justice,” filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking records about FBI targeting of Black activists. The lawsuit enforces the ACLU and MediaJustice’s right to information about a 2017 FBI Intelligence Assessment that asserts, without evidence, that a group of so-called “Black Identity Extremists” poses a threat of domestic terrorism. The Intelligence Assessment was widely disseminated to law enforcement agencies nationwide, raising public concern about government surveillance of Black people and Black-led organizations based on anti-Black stereotypes and First Amendment protected activities.
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 Northern California Cases
- Select Affiliate
- Northern California
- Southern California
- San Diego & Imperial Counties
33 Northern California Cases
California
Oct 2019
![Cross v. SFPD](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Cross v. SFPD
Our Constitution promises all people, regardless of their race, equal protection under the laws. Accordingly, courts have long recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits selective enforcement of criminal laws based on race. Yet law enforcement officers of the City of San Francisco have repeatedly violated that clause, singling out Black people for enforcement.
View case
![Cross v. SFPD](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
California
Criminal Law Reform
Cross v. SFPD
Our Constitution promises all people, regardless of their race, equal protection under the laws. Accordingly, courts have long recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits selective enforcement of criminal laws based on race. Yet law enforcement officers of the City of San Francisco have repeatedly violated that clause, singling out Black people for enforcement.
Oct 2019
View case
California
Oct 2018
![EyeCode](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web17-eyecode-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
ACLU V. DOJ – FOIA Lawsuit Seeking the Government’s Policy on Notifying Americans When It Spies on Them
In February 2017, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the U.S. Department of Justice to find out more about the circumstances under which the government thinks it can spy on Americans without telling them. In June 2017, together with the ACLU of Northern California, we filed a lawsuit to enforce the request in the District Court for the Northern District of California.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![EyeCode](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2019/09/web17-eyecode-1160x768-600x397.jpg)
California
National Security
ACLU V. DOJ – FOIA Lawsuit Seeking the Government’s Policy on Notifying Americans When It Spies on Them
In February 2017, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the U.S. Department of Justice to find out more about the circumstances under which the government thinks it can spy on Americans without telling them. In June 2017, together with the ACLU of Northern California, we filed a lawsuit to enforce the request in the District Court for the Northern District of California.
Oct 2018
Status: Ongoing
View case
California
Jul 2018
![Sigma Beta XI v County of Riverside](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Sigma Beta XI v County of Riverside
RIVERSIDE, CA — In the settlement of a lawsuit against the unconstitutional Youth Accountability Team (YAT) program in Riverside County that treated thousands of youths — especially those of color — like hardened criminals for minor adolescent misbehaviors, the county has agreed to groundbreaking measures.
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
![Sigma Beta XI v County of Riverside](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
California
Racial Justice
Sigma Beta XI v County of Riverside
RIVERSIDE, CA — In the settlement of a lawsuit against the unconstitutional Youth Accountability Team (YAT) program in Riverside County that treated thousands of youths — especially those of color — like hardened criminals for minor adolescent misbehaviors, the county has agreed to groundbreaking measures.
Jul 2018
Status: Closed (Settled)
View case
California
May 2018
![United States of America v. State of California](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
United States of America v. State of California
In March 2017, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit challenging California’s sanctuary laws. The American Civil Liberties Union and co-counsel have moved to intervene in the case to defend the California Values Act, which limits California’s participation in the deportation dragnet.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![United States of America v. State of California](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
California
Immigrants' Rights
United States of America v. State of California
In March 2017, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit challenging California’s sanctuary laws. The American Civil Liberties Union and co-counsel have moved to intervene in the case to defend the California Values Act, which limits California’s participation in the deportation dragnet.
May 2018
Status: Ongoing
View case
California
Aug 2017
![La Follette v. Padilla](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
La Follette v. Padilla
The ACLU is suing California for invalidating the vote-by-mail ballots of tens of thousands of voters without warning. At issue is a state law that allows election officials — who have no handwriting-analysis expertise — to reject a vote-by-mail ballot without giving notice to the voter, if they think the signature on the ballot envelope does not match the one they have in the voter’s registration file. Nothing in the law tells voters they have to sign their ballot envelopes in any particular way; and voters are not informed that their ballots have been thrown out.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![La Follette v. Padilla](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
California
Voting Rights
La Follette v. Padilla
The ACLU is suing California for invalidating the vote-by-mail ballots of tens of thousands of voters without warning. At issue is a state law that allows election officials — who have no handwriting-analysis expertise — to reject a vote-by-mail ballot without giving notice to the voter, if they think the signature on the ballot envelope does not match the one they have in the voter’s registration file. Nothing in the law tells voters they have to sign their ballot envelopes in any particular way; and voters are not informed that their ballots have been thrown out.
Aug 2017
Status: Ongoing
View case