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 v. Autele
Held that trial courts have discretion to determine whether the state constitutional right to be represented by retained counsel of choice is outweighed by other considerations, including ethical requirements or the potential for undue delay and disruption of trial
Commonwealth v. Lee
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court will decide whether mandating a life sentence, without the possibility of parole, for “felony murder” — a legal doctrine that allows someone to be prosecuted for murder for any death that occurs during the commission of a separate felony, even if the defendant never meant to kill anyone — violates the Pennsylvania Constitution’s ban on “cruel” punishments or the federal Eighth Amendment.
Bienvenu v. Defendant 1
Vacated prior ruling and held that a statute, which retroactively revived certain prescribed child sex abuse claims for limited three-year period, did not conflict with state constitutional substantive due process protection against disturbing vested rights
Roman Realty, LLC v. The City of Morgantown
Ruled that the state constitution's takings clause does not require an eminent domain proceeding be initiated to ascertain just compensation, merely that just compensation must be paid
State v. Barr
Held that the mandatory consecutive sentence requirement in the Idaho Code did not violate the separation of powers provision of the Idaho Constitution
State v. Tran
Ruled that the Hawaii constitutional provision allowing the legislature to define jury unanimity required for a conviction of continuous sexual assault against a minor below 14 years of age did not violate Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution
State ex rel. Parson v. Walker
Held that statute governing Governor's power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons placed no limit on Governor's exclusive constitutional discretion over clemency matters
Commonwealth v. Torsilieri
Held that Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act's presumption that adult sex offenders posed higher risk of recidivism did not violate due process
Navahine F. v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation
State reached settlement with plaintiffs who sued over the climate impact of the state transportation system. Under settlement, Hawaii must plan and implement carbon reduction plans; fund and complete green transportation projects; establish oversight unit in the transportation department; and involve youth in the process. The trial court has approved the settlement and has jurisdiction over any disputes that arise.
In Re the State of Texas
The State of Texas requested that a Harris County guaranteed income program in that would use federal funds to disburse $500 cash payments (monthly, for 18 months) to 2,000 low-income county residents be paused as a lawsuit over the program proceeds in the trial court. The Texas Supreme Court issued a temporary injunction.
