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 March 2025.
Featured Cases
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.
Evers v. Marklein
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that statutes permitting a legislative committee to pause, object to, or suspend administrative rules for varying periods of time both before and after promulgation — used by the committee in this case effectively to block for three years a rule banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ patients — facially violate the state constitution’s bicameralism and presentment requirements.
Kaul v. Urmanski
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an 1849 law, which a local prosecutor had claimed was a near-total abortion ban, is impliedly repealed as to abortion by subsequent legislation and does not ban the procedure in the state.
Pima County. v. State
Held that taxes levied to pay for desegregation expenses, which are subject to the Arizona Constitution's one percent limit on residential property taxes, are not "primary property taxes"
Lake v. Hobbs
Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed lower court’s dismissal of claims made by Kari Lake seeking to overturn the 2022 gubernatorial election, which she lost, based on alleged election administration errors. The Arizona Supreme Court denied her petition for review.
People v. Loew
Held that a presiding judge’s ex parte communications to the prosecutor did not violate defendant's constitutional rights
Tatum v. Commissioner of Corrections
Held that a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure applies retroactively under certain conditions and principles regarding the admissibility of eyewitness identification evidence apply retroactively
Wygant v. Lee
The Tennessee Supreme Court will consider a lawsuit brought by voters challenging state house districts passed by the legislature in 2022. The plaintiffs contend that the districts violate a state constitutional provision barring districts from dividing counties. The defendants argue that the court does not have the power to resolve the claims because such challenges are purely political questions to be left to the legislature.
State v. Diole
Held that subjecting incompetent defendants to a determination of whether they committed the acts charged without a jury trial, the protections of medical privilege, and the safeguards of the rules of evidence did not violate due process and equal protection
Williams v. Powell
Held that statutes criminalizing acts likely to prevent or disrupt the General Assembly and criminalizing intentionally disruptive or disorderly conduct at state capital were neither facially overbroad nor facially vague
Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State of Montana (Planned Parenthood 2)
Ruled that minors have a fundamental right to privacy and do not have to seek parental permission to get an abortion in the state.
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.
State v. Hoyle
Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeals's grant of new trial, finding that prosecutor did not unlawfully comment on defendant's exercise of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. On remand, Court of Appeals rejected defendant's other bases for overturning his conviction, finding no reasonable probability that newly discovered evidence would have changed the jury's verdict and evidence the prosecution did not disclose to be immaterial. The Wisconsin high court denied defendant's subsequent petition for review.
