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
Republican National Committee v. Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc; Georgia v. Eternal Vigilance Action
The Georgia Supreme Court ruled invalid under state nondelegation principles four of seven rules passed by the Georgia State Election board, while upholding one rule. The court did not decide the validity of two other rules, holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the provisions.
Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State (Planned Parenthood 1)
Montana Supreme Court held that a 20-week abortion ban; restrictions on medication abortions, including a telehealth ban and 24-hour waiting period; and requirement that providers give patients an opportunity to view an ultrasound and listen to a fetal heartbeat violate the express right to privacy in the state constitution.
Care and Prevention of Eve
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that department of children and families violated the state constitution's free exercise of religion protection when it vaccinated a child temporarily in its custody over the religious objections of her parents. Parents who have temporarily lost custody of their children retain a residual right to direct their religious upbringing, and the state must demonstrate that allowing the child to remain unvaccinated would substantially hinder the department’s compelling interest in the vaccination.
Owens v. People
Upheld a conviction in a high-profile murder case, where the defendant, Sir Mario Owens, appealed based on many alleged errors, including racial bias in jury selection.
Faatz v. Ashcroft
Affirmed an appeals court ruling that the Missouri Senate redistricting plan met constitutional requirements.
LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine
Held that wrongful death statute applies to embryos stored as part of IVF procedure
Hardy v. Chester Arms, LLC
Held that granting statutory immunity to firearms dealers for damages suits arising from use of products by third parties did not violate state constitutional rights to equal protection and to a remedy
Siger v. City of Chester
Ruled that the statutory authority granted to receiver over financially distressed city under the Municipalities Financial Recovery Act superseded any authority granted by city's home-rule charter; the receiver's proposed initiatives were within his statutory and constitutional authority
Gulf Shores City Board of Education v. Mackey
Held that local act that earmarked portion of local taxes to county school board did not violate the constitutional principle of equality of taxation
King County v. Abernathy
Ruled that a right-of-way easement conveyed to railroad operator under the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act was not patented by the United States under the Washington State Constitution, so the state never disclaimed its ownership of the shoreland
Planned Parenthood of Arizona v. Hazelrigg
Declared 160-year-old near-total ban on abortion enforceable, but stayed its decision while lower court considers additional arguments about the law's constitutionality
Zurawski v. Texas
Held that the language in state abortion laws allowing abortions when the life of the mother is threatened is adequate to protect the health of the patient and constitutional. Plaintiffs claimed prohibition on abortions in the case of medical emergencies would violate the due course of law clause and guarantees of equal rights and privileges and equality based on sex.
State v. Santillanes
Held that the State has a constitutional right to appeal defendant's expungement order relating to a felony marijuana conviction because the order affects the State's substantial right to ensure defendants face the legal consequences of their actions
