Supreme Court Term 2024-2025
Were 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 Mississippis Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. Were 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 Louisianas 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 Commissionan agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independentto 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 勛圖眻畦 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 勛圖眻畦, the 勛圖眻畦 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, Womens 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 勛圖眻畦 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 courts decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation 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 Alabamas 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 Carolinas 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the states federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the states 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 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 Courts ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
All Cases
1,602 Court Cases

North Carolina
Dec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Billard v. Charlotte Catholic High School
Lonnie Billard worked at Charlotte Catholic High School for more than a decade both as full-time drama and as a long-term substitute teacher and has won numerous teaching awards, including teacher of the year. In October 2014, Lonnie wrote a Facebook post announcing that he and his long-time partner were getting married. Later that year, the school told Lonnie he could no longer work as a substitute teacher because his engagement and marriage to another man was contrary to the religious principles of the Catholic Church.
Explore case
North Carolina
Dec 2024

LGBTQ Rights
Billard v. Charlotte Catholic High School
Lonnie Billard worked at Charlotte Catholic High School for more than a decade both as full-time drama and as a long-term substitute teacher and has won numerous teaching awards, including teacher of the year. In October 2014, Lonnie wrote a Facebook post announcing that he and his long-time partner were getting married. Later that year, the school told Lonnie he could no longer work as a substitute teacher because his engagement and marriage to another man was contrary to the religious principles of the Catholic Church.

California
Dec 2024
Disability Rights
Powers v. McDonough
Every night, thousands of veterans sleep without shelter on the streets of Los Angeles. Meanwhile, the Department of Veterans Affairs owns hundreds of acres of land in prime West Los Angelesland directly adjacent to a VA medical facility that was once earmarked to house veterans, but today is instead home to private school sports fields and an oil well.
In November 2022, a group of unhoused veterans and a non-profit organization filed suit alleging that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) failed to provide adequate housing and health care to veterans with severe disabilities in Los Angeles. These failures have significantly undermined veterans abilities to access the benefits they are entitled to by law, leaving many stranded on the streets after serving our country. The veterans sued the VA under the Rehabilitation Act, a federal statute that prohibits federal agencies from discriminating against people with disabilities. As a remedy, the plaintiffs seek the construction of significant units of permanent supportive housing on the
The VA argued that a provision of the Veterans Judicial Review Act (VJRA) a federal statute that prohibits federal district courts from second-guessing VAs individualized benefits determinationsbars federal district courts from hearing the veterans Rehabilitation Act claims. Should the court accept this position, it would deprive veterans of a meaningful opportunity to have their rights under the Rehabilitation Act and other generally applicable nondiscrimination statutes enforced.
Explore case
California
Dec 2024

Disability Rights
Powers v. McDonough
Every night, thousands of veterans sleep without shelter on the streets of Los Angeles. Meanwhile, the Department of Veterans Affairs owns hundreds of acres of land in prime West Los Angelesland directly adjacent to a VA medical facility that was once earmarked to house veterans, but today is instead home to private school sports fields and an oil well.
In November 2022, a group of unhoused veterans and a non-profit organization filed suit alleging that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) failed to provide adequate housing and health care to veterans with severe disabilities in Los Angeles. These failures have significantly undermined veterans abilities to access the benefits they are entitled to by law, leaving many stranded on the streets after serving our country. The veterans sued the VA under the Rehabilitation Act, a federal statute that prohibits federal agencies from discriminating against people with disabilities. As a remedy, the plaintiffs seek the construction of significant units of permanent supportive housing on the
The VA argued that a provision of the Veterans Judicial Review Act (VJRA) a federal statute that prohibits federal district courts from second-guessing VAs individualized benefits determinationsbars federal district courts from hearing the veterans Rehabilitation Act claims. Should the court accept this position, it would deprive veterans of a meaningful opportunity to have their rights under the Rehabilitation Act and other generally applicable nondiscrimination statutes enforced.

Arizona
Dec 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Reuss v. Arizona
Arizona health care providers filed a lawsuit challenging a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which is in violation of the states new constitutional amendment protecting the fundamental right to abortion. The case, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, asserts that the ban is unconstitutional because it denies Arizonans access to abortion care in violation of the new constitutional amendment passed by the voters.
Explore case
Arizona
Dec 2024

Reproductive Freedom
Reuss v. Arizona
Arizona health care providers filed a lawsuit challenging a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, which is in violation of the states new constitutional amendment protecting the fundamental right to abortion. The case, filed in Maricopa County Superior Court, asserts that the ban is unconstitutional because it denies Arizonans access to abortion care in violation of the new constitutional amendment passed by the voters.

Louisiana
Nov 2024
Religious Liberty
Rev. Roake v. Brumley
On June 24, 2024, a multi-faith group of nine Louisiana families with children in public schools filed a federal-court lawsuit in Louisiana, challenging House Bill No. 71 (H.B. 71), a new state law that requires every elementary, secondary, and postsecondary public school in the state to permanently display an official version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The families are represented by the 勛圖眻畦, the 勛圖眻畦 of Louisiana, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. The complaint alleges that H.B. 71 violates both the separation of church and state, as protected by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.
Explore case
Louisiana
Nov 2024

Religious Liberty
Rev. Roake v. Brumley
On June 24, 2024, a multi-faith group of nine Louisiana families with children in public schools filed a federal-court lawsuit in Louisiana, challenging House Bill No. 71 (H.B. 71), a new state law that requires every elementary, secondary, and postsecondary public school in the state to permanently display an official version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The families are represented by the 勛圖眻畦, the 勛圖眻畦 of Louisiana, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Freedom From Religion Foundation, with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP serving as pro bono counsel. The complaint alleges that H.B. 71 violates both the separation of church and state, as protected by the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

Maine
Nov 2024
Religious Liberty
St. Dominic Academy v. Makin
The 勛圖眻畦, 勛圖眻畦 of Maine, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit arguing that religious schools in Maine participating in the states school tuition program must comply with all eligibility requirements of the program including a prohibition on discrimination on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity, among other protected characteristics.
Explore case
Maine
Nov 2024

Religious Liberty
St. Dominic Academy v. Makin
The 勛圖眻畦, 勛圖眻畦 of Maine, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit arguing that religious schools in Maine participating in the states school tuition program must comply with all eligibility requirements of the program including a prohibition on discrimination on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity, among other protected characteristics.