Supreme Court Term 2024-2025
Weāre breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated June 23, 2025
Ongoing
Updated June 13, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated June 6, 2025
Ongoing
Updated May 8, 2025
Featured
Georgia Supreme Court
Jun 2025

Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The ³Ō¹ĻÖ±²„ 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 courtās decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation ā 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 Alabamaās 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.
Washington, D.C.
Apr 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 Commissionāan agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independentāto 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 ³Ō¹ĻÖ±²„ and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
Maryland
Apr 2025

Religious Liberty
LGBTQ Rights
Mahmoud v. Taylor
On April 9, 2025, the ³Ō¹ĻÖ±²„ and ³Ō¹ĻÖ±²„ of Maryland filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) in its efforts to ensure that its English Language Arts curriculum is LGBTQ-inclusive.
U.S. Supreme Court
Mar 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.
New Hampshire
Mar 2025

Voting Rights
Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan
This lawsuit challenges HB 1569, a new law that will make New Hampshire the only state to require every person to produce documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote for both state and federal elections. It also challenges HB 1569ās elimination a preexisting protection for votersānamely, an affidavit option that allowed voters who faced surprise challenges to their eligibility at the polls to swear to their qualifications and cast a ballot. Accordingly, HB 1569 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution by placing substantial burdens on New Hampshirites at all stages of the voting process, and will arbitrarily disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands of qualified voters.
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 Carolinaās 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the stateās federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the stateās Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
Texas
Oct 2024

Voting Rights
OCA-Greater Houston v. Paxton
Texas has growing Hispanic and Black populations that helped propel record voter turnout in the November 2020 election. The Texas Legislature responded to this increased civic participation with an omnibus election bill titled Senate Bill 1āSB 1 for shortāthat targeted election practices that made voting more accessible to traditionally marginalized voters like voters of color, voters with disabilities, and voters with limited English proficiency. Since 2021, SB 1 has resulted in tens of thousands of lawful votes being rejected, and it remains a threat to democracy in Texas.
Ohio
Sep 2024

Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The ³Ō¹ĻÖ±²„, the ³Ō¹ĻÖ±²„ 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, Womenās 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.
All Cases
1,589 Court Cases

U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Edwards v. Vannoy
Whether the Supreme Courtās 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.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021

Criminal Law Reform
Edwards v. Vannoy
Whether the Supreme Courtās 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.

U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Lombardo v. City of Saint Louis, 20ā391
Whether a reasonable jury could find that police officers violate the Constitutionās 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.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021

Criminal Law Reform
Lombardo v. City of Saint Louis, 20ā391
Whether a reasonable jury could find that police officers violate the Constitutionās 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.

U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Disability Rights
California v. Texas
Whether Congressās 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?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021

Disability Rights
California v. Texas
Whether Congressās 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?

U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
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?
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021

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?

U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Juvenile Justice
Jones v. Mississippi
Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is āpermanently incorrigibleā before imposing a sentence of life without parole.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021

Juvenile Justice
Jones v. Mississippi
Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is āpermanently incorrigibleā before imposing a sentence of life without parole.