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
State of Washington v. Gator's Custom Guns
Washington Supreme Court reversed a lower court and upheld the state's ban on selling or manufacturing magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. The majority held that large-capacity magazines are “not” arms within the scope of the state or federal constitutional right to bear arms, and the ability to purchase them is not "necessary to the realization of the core right to possess a firearm in self-defense."
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 to invalidate more than 60,000 votes.
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.
Layla H v. Virginia
Plaintiffs claim that state’s practice of approving permits for fossil-fuel infrastructure violates substantive due process and public trust rights to natural resources, protected by the state constitution. They claim such practice infringes these rights by contributing to greenhouse-gas pollution and climate change. A trial court dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint, and the intermediate appellate court affirmed on the basis that the plaintiffs lack standing. Finding that there was no reversible error, the Virginia Supreme Court declined to grant review of the appellate court decision.
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
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.
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.
SisterSong v. Georgia
Plaintiffs claim that abortion ban violates the state constitution’s right to liberty and privacy and guarantee of equal protection
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.
