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.
In re Covid-related Restrictions on Religious Services
Affirmed dismissal of the clergy members’ challenge to restrictions on religious gatherings during the Covid-19 pandemic. Because the restrictions were lifted before the action was filed and the possibility of future pandemic conditions is speculative, the court said, the plaintiffs cannot establish irreparable harm for injunctive relief or standing for their declaratory claim. The court also found the governor immune from the clergies’ damages claims, rejecting the argument that his restrictions fell outside the state tort law’s liability exemption for “discretionary” acts because he lacked authority to interfere with religious worship under the state constitution.
Kanahele v. State
Held that the state's transfer of control over a mountain access road constituted a breach of its constitutional duty to carry out the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act
State of Washington v. Luthi
Held that an in-court holding cell, even during pretrial hearings when a jury is not present, undermines the presumption of innocence, limits defendants’ ability to confer confidentially with counsel, and is contrary to the “formal dignity” of the courtroom and treating defendants’ respectfully.
Montanans for Election Reform Action Fund v. Knudsen
Held that petitioner’s proposed ballot issue did not violate the separate-vote requirement provision
People v. Watkins
Held that defense counsel's decision to forgo a request for a cross-racial identification charge did not constitute an “egregious” single error that rose to level of constitutionally ineffective assistance
Fearrington v. City of Greenville
Ruled that an Act governing red light cameras in a city did not violate the Fines and Forfeitures Clause of the North Carolina Constitution
State v. Brown
Held that the defendant had a legitimate, reasonable expectation of privacy when he spoke with his mother in police station interview room under both the Fourth Amendment and Rhode Island's right against self-incrimination
Independent School District No. 12 v. State of Oklahoma
Ruled in a unanimous decision, against the state board and instructed it to dismiss the enforcement proceedings it brought against a district school library over certain books that allegedly violated new state board rules against sexualized content.
Texas Department of Transportation v. Self
Held that the government must pay compensation to the landowners when it intentionally destroys private property for public use, even when it acted with the mistaken belief that it has a legal right to do so
Thurston v. The League of Women Voters of Arkansas
Held that Acts placing restrictions on absentee ballots and requiring valid photographic identification to cast a ballot did not clearly violate state constitutional provisions guaranteeing equal protection and free and equal elections
