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 November 2024.
Featured Cases
City of Fargo v. State
Held that a 2023 statute barring localities from enacting ordinances related to the purchase, sale, or possession of firearms and ammunitions that are more restrictive than state law preempted the city of Fargo’s limits on such sales and did not violate state constitutional “home rule” clauses as applied to Fargo’s restrictions.
Evers v. Marklein
Court will decide whether a legislative committee’s vetoes of an agency rule that would ban the practice of “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ patients violates the separation of powers principles in the Wisconsin Constitution.
In an earlier installment of the case, the court ruled 6–1 that the law permitting the effective legislative veto of agency land-conservation expenditures violated the executive branch’s “core power” to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” While the Wisconsin Constitution gives the legislature authority to create an agency, define its parameters, and appropriate funds for it, the power to spend those funds in accordance with legislation lies solely with the executive, the court said.
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.
O’Neil v. Gianforte
Held that the state constitution’s protection of the public’s “right to know” allows for a limited gubernatorial privilege exception if the governor meets the “high bar of demonstrating that the information is essential to carrying out a constitutional duty and that its disclosure would chill future candor.” Also held that the process for determining whether a particular document otherwise subject to the "right to know" may be shielded by gubernatorial privilege should be the same as for other "candor privileges" (e.g., attorney-client, doctor-patient), including in camera review by the trial court to determine the proper scope. Remanded to the district court to conduct such review with respect to the requested agency documents.
City of Fargo v. State
Held that a 2023 statute barring localities from enacting ordinances related to the purchase, sale, or possession of firearms and ammunitions that are more restrictive than state law preempted the city of Fargo’s limits on such sales and did not violate state constitutional “home rule” clauses as applied to Fargo’s restrictions.
Texas v. Margaret Daley Carpenter
Texas’s attorney general is suing a New York doctor for mailing abortion-including drugs to a woman in Texas, claiming she practiced medicine in Texas without a Texas license and improperly aided an abortion. The attorney general seeks to bar her from doing so again and asks for at least $100,000 in damages.
