State Case Database
Search State Court Report's database of significant state supreme court decisions and pending cases. Download decisions and briefs for cases that develop state constitutional law. This is a selected database and does not include every state supreme court case. See methodology and "How to Use the State Case Database" for more information.
This database is updated monthly, although individual cases may be updated more frequently. Last updated comprehensively with cases decided through April 2025.
Featured Cases
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
South Carolina Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable political questions, which state courts cannot review, under the state constitution.
League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (LWV 1)
Utah Supreme Court sent partisan gerrymandering case back to lower court to consider whether the legislature violated voters' fundamental right to "reform or alter" their government when it overturned redistricting reforms passed by initiative. Lower court found legislators violated that right and struck the current congressional map.
Black Voters Matter v. Byrd
Florida Supreme Court upheld the state's 2022 congressional map against voting rights groups' challenge that it diminishes Black voters' ability to elect candidates of their choice in violation of a 2010 amendment, finding the plaintiffs had not proven the possibility of drawing a remedial map that complies with the federal equal protection clause.
Assurecare Adult Home v. Bolina
Washington Supreme Court will consider a challenge by residential caregivers to elderly and disabled adults to an exclusion in the state's minimum wage law for live-in caregivers, brought under the state constitution's "privileges and immunities" clause.
J.P. Morgan Chase v. City of Corsicana
Texas Supreme Court will consider whether a state constitutional provision authorizing publicly-funded economic development programs is subject to the state constitution's "gift clauses," restricting grants of public money to private entities.
State v. McFarland
Connecticut Supreme Court held that the state constitution’s due process provisions require a more protective balancing test for pre-arrest delay than the approach adopted by the majority of federal circuits under the federal due process clause.
State v. McLain
Maine Supreme Court held that the state constitution's privilege against self-incrimination provides greater protection than the federal Fifth Amendment with respect to waiving that privilege.
Bhuiyan v. State (In re F.B.)
Oklahoma Supreme Court held that due process requires that waiver of an absent parent's right to a jury trial in a parental rights termination proceeding requires notice of the consequences of failing to appear
Lyon v. Riverside Methodist Hospital
Ohio Court of Appeals held that a law capping noneconomic damages for medical malpractice claims does not facially violate state constitutional due process or equal protection, but did violate those guarantees as applied to the plaintiff whose award was signficantly reduced for extreme injuries.
Mohebali v. Hayes
North Carolina Court of Appeals held that a law capping jury awards of noneconomic damages for medical malpractice did not violate the state constitutional jury trial right of a plaintiff who sued her physician for negligence for allowing her pregnancy to extend to 44-weeks, resulting in fetal death.
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
South Carolina Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable political questions, which state courts cannot review, under the state constitution.
League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (LWV 1)
Utah Supreme Court sent partisan gerrymandering case back to lower court to consider whether the legislature violated voters' fundamental right to "reform or alter" their government when it overturned redistricting reforms passed by initiative. Lower court found legislators violated that right and struck the current congressional map.
Atencio v. State of New Mexico
Plaintiffs have sought review from the New Mexico Supreme Court of an appellate court decision that dismissed their claim under a state constitutional clause requiring the legislature to control pollution based on the court's interpretation that that clause does not create an individual right the judiciary can enforce or protect.
