Supreme Court Term 2024-2025
We鈥檙e breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated July 29, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 25, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 24, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 21, 2025
Featured
Mississippi
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
White v. Mississippi State Board of Elections
District lines used to elect Mississippi鈥檚 Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. We鈥檙e suing because this dilutes the voting strength of Black residents in state Supreme Court elections, in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution.
Louisiana
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
Nairne v. Landry
Nairne v. Landry poses a challenge under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to Louisiana鈥檚 House and Senate legislative maps on behalf of plaintiff Black voters and Black voters across the state.
Washington, D.C.
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump
On March 25, 2025, in a sweeping and unprecedented Executive Order, President Trump attempted to usurp the power to regulate federal elections from Congress and the States. Among other things, the Executive Order directs the Election Assistance Commission鈥攁n agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent鈥攖o require voters to show a passport or other citizenship documentation in order to register to vote in federal elections. If implemented, the Executive Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible Americans to register and vote and upend the administration of federal elections.
On behalf of leading voter registration organizations and advocacy organizations, the 51品茶 and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
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.
Ohio
Jul 2025
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The 51品茶, the 51品茶 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鈥檚 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.
Georgia Supreme Court
Jun 2025
Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The 51品茶 and partner organizations intervened in this case to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case challenging a number of rules passed by the Georgia State Election Board. We challenged the rule requiring that the number of votes cast be hand counted at the polling place prior to the tabulation of votes. In a critical victory for Georgia voters, in June 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a lower court鈥檚 decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation 鈥� a process widely criticized for risking delays, ballot spoliation, and voter disenfranchisement.
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2025
Voting Rights
Racial Justice
Allen v. Milligan
Whether Alabama鈥檚 congressional districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because they discriminate against Black voters. We succeeded in winning a new map for 2024 elections which, for the first time, has two congressional district that provide Black voters a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing despite multiple attempts by Alabama to stop us at the Supreme Court. Despite this win, Alabama is still defending its discriminatory map, and a trial was held in February 2025 to determine the map for the rest of the decade.
In May 2025, a federal court ruled that Alabama's 2023 congressional map both violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and was enacted by the Alabama Legislature with racially discriminatory intent.
South Carolina Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
This case involves a state constitutional challenge to South Carolina鈥檚 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state鈥檚 federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state鈥檚 Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
Reproductive Freedom
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 鈥� the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) 鈥� 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鈥檚 ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
All Cases
1,604 Court Cases
South Carolina
Sep 2021
Racial Justice
White v. Shwedo
In the latest front in the nationwide fight against the criminalization of poverty, on October 31, 2019, the 51品茶, 51品茶 of South Carolina, Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC, Southern Poverty Law Center, and South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina鈥檚 policy of automatically suspending the driver鈥檚 licenses of people with unpaid traffic tickets. The South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles does not ensure that people who cannot pay will not lose their licenses in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment鈥檚 promise of due process and equal protection under the law. South Carolina鈥檚 wealth-based license suspensions impact more than 190,000 people, funneling those who are unable to pay, particularly poor people of color, deep into cycles of poverty, job loss, traffic violations, and entanglement with the legal system.
Explore case
South Carolina
Sep 2021
Racial Justice
White v. Shwedo
In the latest front in the nationwide fight against the criminalization of poverty, on October 31, 2019, the 51品茶, 51品茶 of South Carolina, Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC, Southern Poverty Law Center, and South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina鈥檚 policy of automatically suspending the driver鈥檚 licenses of people with unpaid traffic tickets. The South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles does not ensure that people who cannot pay will not lose their licenses in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment鈥檚 promise of due process and equal protection under the law. South Carolina鈥檚 wealth-based license suspensions impact more than 190,000 people, funneling those who are unable to pay, particularly poor people of color, deep into cycles of poverty, job loss, traffic violations, and entanglement with the legal system.
Court Case
Sep 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Cargian v. Breitling
Fred Cargain was hired by Breitling USA in 1990 and served as a leading sales rep for the company for over 15 years. In 2010 following the hiring of a new CEO, Cargain started to be treated differently than other men in similar positions. After multiple promotions and 23 years with the company, Cargain was fired in 2013.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Cargian v. Breitling
Fred Cargain was hired by Breitling USA in 1990 and served as a leading sales rep for the company for over 15 years. In 2010 following the hiring of a new CEO, Cargain started to be treated differently than other men in similar positions. After multiple promotions and 23 years with the company, Cargain was fired in 2013.
Tennessee
Sep 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Nashville Community Bail Fund v. Gentry
In Nashville, local officials keep money posted as bail to pay fines and fees. This happens even when the person whose bond was posted shows up to their required court dates. Under a local court rule and policies from the criminal clerk, pretrial release is conditioned on future payment, which leverages pretrial freedom to make money for the government.
Explore case
Tennessee
Sep 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Smart Justice
Nashville Community Bail Fund v. Gentry
In Nashville, local officials keep money posted as bail to pay fines and fees. This happens even when the person whose bond was posted shows up to their required court dates. Under a local court rule and policies from the criminal clerk, pretrial release is conditioned on future payment, which leverages pretrial freedom to make money for the government.
Colorado Supreme Court
Sep 2021
Privacy & Technology
National Security
People v. Tafoya
This case concerns whether the government may surreptitiously record the activities around a person鈥檚 home using a remotely operated, pole-mounted video camera for an extended period of time without a warrant. On September 13, 2021, the Colorado Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment protects against such surveillance and requires that police obtain a warrant.
Explore case
Colorado Supreme Court
Sep 2021
Privacy & Technology
National Security
People v. Tafoya
This case concerns whether the government may surreptitiously record the activities around a person鈥檚 home using a remotely operated, pole-mounted video camera for an extended period of time without a warrant. On September 13, 2021, the Colorado Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment protects against such surveillance and requires that police obtain a warrant.
Court Case
Aug 2021
Racial Justice
+2 Issues
J.W. v. Paley
It is critical that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals clarify that the Fourth Amendment applies to the use of force against schoolchildren. J.W. v. Paley involves Fourteenth and Fourth Amendment claims stemming from a police officer tasing a high school student with disabilities who was attempting to exit the school building to calm down following an incident with another student. The district court dismissed the Fourteenth Amendment claim based on precedent, but allowed the Fourth Amendment claim to proceed, denying qualified immunity to the officer. The Fifth Circuit, however, reversed the lower court鈥檚 decision regarding the Fourth Amendment claim, ultimately leaving schoolchildren without any constitutional protection from excessive force by law enforcement in the Fifth Circuit.
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2021
Racial Justice
+2 Issues
J.W. v. Paley
It is critical that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals clarify that the Fourth Amendment applies to the use of force against schoolchildren. J.W. v. Paley involves Fourteenth and Fourth Amendment claims stemming from a police officer tasing a high school student with disabilities who was attempting to exit the school building to calm down following an incident with another student. The district court dismissed the Fourteenth Amendment claim based on precedent, but allowed the Fourth Amendment claim to proceed, denying qualified immunity to the officer. The Fifth Circuit, however, reversed the lower court鈥檚 decision regarding the Fourth Amendment claim, ultimately leaving schoolchildren without any constitutional protection from excessive force by law enforcement in the Fifth Circuit.