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 16, 2024
Updated July 3, 2024
Ongoing
Updated June 26, 2024
Ongoing
Updated June 14, 2024
Featured
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
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
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
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
![Pham v. Guzman Chavez](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Pham v. Guzman Chavez
Whether the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) requires a bond hearing for noncitizens who are detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) while they seek protection from persecution or torture.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Pham v. Guzman Chavez](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Immigrants' Rights
Pham v. Guzman Chavez
Whether the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) requires a bond hearing for noncitizens who are detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) while they seek protection from persecution or torture.
Dec 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
![Edwards v. Vannoy](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Edwards v. Vannoy
Whether the Supreme Court’s decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, holding that the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a unanimous jury verdict, applies retroactively to cases on federal collateral review.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Edwards v. Vannoy](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Criminal Law Reform
Edwards v. Vannoy
Whether the Supreme Court’s decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, holding that the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a unanimous jury verdict, applies retroactively to cases on federal collateral review.
Dec 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
![Lombardo v. City of Saint Louis, 20–391](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Lombardo v. City of Saint Louis, 20–391
Whether a reasonable jury could find that police officers violate the Constitution’s prohibition on excessive force when they kill a shackled and handcuffed arrestee inside of a jail cell by holding him face-down on the ground and pressing into his back until he suffocated, also known as compression asphyxiation.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Lombardo v. City of Saint Louis, 20–391](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Criminal Law Reform
Lombardo v. City of Saint Louis, 20–391
Whether a reasonable jury could find that police officers violate the Constitution’s prohibition on excessive force when they kill a shackled and handcuffed arrestee inside of a jail cell by holding him face-down on the ground and pressing into his back until he suffocated, also known as compression asphyxiation.
Dec 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
![California v. Texas](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
California v. Texas
Whether Congress’s zeroing out of the tax assessment in the Affordable Care Act for people who fail to obtain health insurance renders the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional?
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![California v. Texas](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Disability Rights
California v. Texas
Whether Congress’s zeroing out of the tax assessment in the Affordable Care Act for people who fail to obtain health insurance renders the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional?
Dec 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
![Robert Andrews v. State of New Jersey](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Robert Andrews v. State of New Jersey
Whether the Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects an individual from being compelled to recall and truthfully disclose a memorized smartphone passcode, where communicating the passcode may lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence to be used against him in a criminal prosecution?
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Robert Andrews v. State of New Jersey](https://wp.api.aclu.org/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Privacy & Technology
Robert Andrews v. State of New Jersey
Whether the Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment protects an individual from being compelled to recall and truthfully disclose a memorized smartphone passcode, where communicating the passcode may lead to the discovery of incriminating evidence to be used against him in a criminal prosecution?
Dec 2021
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case