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.
Amedure v. State
Ruled that Election Law § 9-209 (2) (g), which provides that if the members of a bipartisan local board charged with reviewing ballots are split as to a ballot's validity, the ballot shall be cast and canvassed, did not violate the equal representation mandate set forth in article II, section 8 of the New York Constitution and principles of judicial review and separation of powers
Cross v. State
Affirmed a lower court's preliminary injunction against Montana's ban on gender-affirming care for minors. Applying strict scrutiny, the state high court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the ban likely violates the state constitution's express right to privacy.
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
Original petition challenging 2022 congressional district map as partisan gerrymandering in violation of the South Carolina Constitution and arguing that the more explicit guarantee of equal voting rights in the state constitution (as compared to the federal) make such a challenge justiciable, unlike federal partisan gerrymandering claims under Rucho v. Common Cause (U.S. Supreme Court 2019). The same map was previously challenged in federal court as racially discriminatory line-drawing in violation of the U.S. Constitution, but the U.S. Supreme Court in Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (2024) found that the plaintiffs did not meet their burden of proving that racial considerations predominated over partisan political motivations.
State ex rel. Martens v. Findlay Municipal Court
Overruled precedent that recognized a “public right” exception to standing requirements, which allowed plaintiffs seeking to enforce important public rights to avoid having to show personal injury. Affirmed dismissal for lack of traditional or taxpayer standing.
In re N.S.
Iowa Supreme Court issued divided opinion upholding state process for restoring gun rights revoked by federal law after an involuntary commitment, holding the process does not violate 2022's Amendment 1A that expressly required judges to apply strict scrutiny to gun regulations
Reuss v. Arizona
Healthcare providers seek to block enforcement of Arizona's 15-week abortion ban on the basis that it violates a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion. On plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the state did not contest, the trial court permanently blocked the ban.
In re Texas House of Representatives
Held that separation-of-powers principles prevent the Texas legislature from using its subpoena power to halt a long-scheduled execution.
Crawford v. Commonwealth
Held that Philadelphia, city residents, and a gun-safety group had failed to state a claim that state laws preempting local gun control measures violate state constitutional due process, rejecting their argument that the clause protects a collective right to use local regulation as a means of self-defense from acts of gun violence.
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. South Carolina (Planned Parenthood 2)
Court will determine whether a "fetal heartbeat" -- the point after which abortion is banned in the state -- occurs at the sixth or ninth week of pregnancy based on the statutory definition, and whether the ban is void for vagueness under the state due process clause.
State v. Vasquez
In response to certified questions from the state intermediate appellate court, held that a trial court may, of its own accord without a defense motion, order a hearing as to whether evidence should be suppressed. The questions arose after a trial judge noticed a pattern of warrantless searches and seizures in her docket and set suppression hearings in 30 cases, ultimately supressing evidence in 6 cases after the prosecution chose to dismiss 13.
