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 April 2025.
Featured Cases
Access Independent Health Services v. Wrigley
North Dakota Supreme Court upheld state's abortion ban despite three of five justices concluding a health-risk exception was unconstitutionally vague, because the state constitution requires four justices to declare legislation unconstitutional
Clarke v. Town of Newburgh
New York Court of Appeals held local government could not assert state or federal equal protection challenge to the vote dilution provision of the state's Voting Rights Act
League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (LWV 1)
Utah Supreme Court sent partisan gerrymandering case back to lower court to consider whether the legislature violated voters' fundamental right to "reform or alter" their government when it overturned redistricting reforms passed by initiative. Lower court found legislators violated that right and struck the current congressional map, adopting an alternative proposed by the plaintiffs
Clarke v. Town of Newburgh
New York Court of Appeals held local government could not assert state or federal equal protection challenge to the vote dilution provision of the state's Voting Rights Act
Onondaga v. New York
New York Court of Appeals upheld law that would change many county and town elections to even years to align with state and federal contests, finding it does not violate state constitutional home rule or voting rights
League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (LWV 1)
Utah Supreme Court sent partisan gerrymandering case back to lower court to consider whether the legislature violated voters' fundamental right to "reform or alter" their government when it overturned redistricting reforms passed by initiative. Lower court found legislators violated that right and struck the current congressional map, adopting an alternative proposed by the plaintiffs
McVay v. Cockroft
Oklahoma Supreme Court will consider whether a law making it harder for citizen initiative petitions to qualify for the ballot violates citizens' state constitutional initative, free speech, and equal protection rights.
Luther v. Hoskins
Voters challenge Missouri's new congressional district map arguing the state constitution prohibits mid-decade redistricting.
Wise v. State
Voters challenge the state's new congressional district map arguing it violates the state constitution's prohibition on mid-decade congressional redistricting, compactness and contiguity requirements, and equal protection clause.
Bailey v. McKintosh County, Webster v. McIntosh County, McIntosh County v. Webster
Georgia Supreme Court reversed a lower court order stopping a special election on a referendum to repeal a county zoning ordinance that could increase home sizes in a historic community of slave descendants, holding the state constitutional clause giving voters that referendum authority extends to zoning ordinances.
Montenegro v. Fontes
Arizona Supreme Court held state lawmakers have standing to challenge provisions of a citizen-initiated campaign-disclosure law they allege improperly delegate legislative power to a commission in violation of separation of powers.
Center for Coalfield Justice v. Washington County Board of Elections
Pennsylvania Supreme Court held a county election board policy that provided no notice to voters whose mail-in ballots were disqualified for errors and gave the misimpression they could not vote by provisional ballot violated voters' procedural due process rights
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
South Carolina Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable political questions, which state courts cannot review, under the state constitution.
