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 February 2025.
Featured Cases
LeMieux v. Evers
The Wisconsin Supreme Court held, in a divided decision, that the governor did not exceed his partial veto authority under the state constitution when he altered digits, words, and punctuation in a budget bill to extend a school funding increase from 2 to 402 years.
Griffin v. State Board of Elections
A candidate for a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court, who lost by over 700 votes, claims that the state board of elections followed an incorrect process for registering voters and seeks in invalidate more than 60,000 votes.
People v. Taylor; People v. Czarnecki
Michigan Supreme Court held that mandatory life-without-parole sentences violate the state constitution’s protection against “cruel or unusual” punishment for anyone under age 21 at the time of the offense. The decision extends the court’s 2022 ruling in People v. Parks that such sentences are unconstitutional for those 18 or under.
State ex rel. Citizens Not Politicians v. Ohio Ballot Board
Largely upheld ballot language drafted by ballot board for a 2024 initiative that would have created an independent redistricting commission, concluding that characterization of the commission as "required to gerrymander" district boundaries was not unconstitutionally misleading.
Republican National Committee v. Aguilar
The Nevada Supreme Court will hear an appeal of a denial of a preliminary injunction that sought to stop the practice of counting as valid mail-in ballots that lack a postmark date but arrive by the statutory deadline. State law mandates that ballots for which the “date of the postmark cannot be determined” must arrive by 5:00 p.m. on the third day after the election.
League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa v. Pate
Will consider whether voting materials fall within an exception to a state law that generally requires all "official documents" to be in English but exempts "language usage required by or necessary to secure" state constitutional or federal law rights. The parties dispute in part whether non-English voting materials are necessary to secure the constitutional right to vote.
State ex rel. Brooks v. Evnen
The Nebraska Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a proposed abortion-rights amendment could go before voters, rejecting claims that it violated the subject-subject rule and was so vague that it would mislead voters
Coleman v. Ashcroft
The Missouri Supreme Court rejected claims that Amendment 3, a ballot measure that would protect abortion access until viability, violated the single-subject rule and state election law by failing to list all the existing laws that its passage would repeal. The ruling ensured that Amendment 3 would remain on the ballot.
Held v. Montana
Held that Montana’s policy of excluding greenhouse gas emissions and related climate impacts from environmental reviews of fossil fuel projects violated the state constitution’s guarantee of a clean and healthful environment.
Acorn International v. State
Held that the Secretary of State's response to ACORN International's public records request asking for documentation of the actual costs for a yearly subscription to state voter database did not violate organization's constitutional right to know
Oberholzer v. Galapo
Held that neighbors' anti-racist signs did not intolerably intrude on homeowners' substantial privacy interests, and thus constitutional free-speech protections did not permit trial court to enjoin continued display of the signs
Eidson v. South Carolina Department of Education
Held that state program providing taxpayer-funded education accounts to low-income families cannot be allocated by parents to private school tuition because doing so violates a state constitutional ban on use of public funds for the “direct benefit” of private educational institutions.
Francisco v. Affiliated Urologists
Held that statutes requiring the patient to obtain expert testimony to establish the requisite standard of care in the patient's negligence action did not violate the anti-abrogation clause, despite the patient's allegations that no expert would testify
