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 May 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
Commons of Lake Houston v. City of Houston
Held that a floodplain regulation can effect a regulatory “taking” under the state constitution even when the regulation is intended to promote compliance with the federal flood-insurance program
State v. Maestas
Held that only fees collected, not fines imposed, by the judicial department are subject to the limitations of Article VI, Section 30 of the New Mexico Constitution and a punitive contempt fee payable to a third party did not violate the provision
Opternative, Inc. v. South Carolina Board of Medical Examiners
Will consider whether a law that prevents telehealth companies from providing online vision tests for glasses and contact prescriptions in the state violates the businesses’ equal protection and due process rights under the South Carolina Constitution.
McCombie v. Illinois State Board of Elections
Refused to accept an original action by the state’s house majority leader and voters, claiming that house districts drawn in 2021 are partisan and not compact, finding the complaint untimely and barred by laches because the plaintiffs did not exercise due diligence in bringing suit. The dissenting justice said the majority was wrong to discredit the plaintiffs’ argument that they had to collect data from multiple election cycles. Because the Illinois high court has never adjudicated a state constitutional partisan gerrymandering claim before, he opined, it has not provided guidance on whether such data — which was required for federal constitutional claims until the U.S. Supreme Court in Rucho v. Common Cause (2019) ruled such claims cannot be brought — is applicable for a state constitutional challenge.
In re Doe
Held that the state Board of Medicine did not violate a physician's due process rights when it temporarily suspended his license after finding, ex parte at a regularly scheduled hearing, that there were sufficient facts to prove that he posed an imminent danger to life or health
State v. Dias
Held that the Georgia Supreme Court had previously only ruled that the state constitution's right against self-incrimination precluded admission of a suspect's right to consent to a breath test and had never ruled that drawing someone’s blood implicated the right against compelled self-incrimination
Boline v. JKC Trucking
Held that impecuniosity following an award of sanctions did not violate the open courts provision of state constitution, which guarantees a right to access state courts
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.
McNabb v. Harrison
Held that the state constitution requires a candidate running for municipal judgeship to be a resident of the same municipality to which he will be assigned, both at time of the election and for one year prior
State v. Mercedes
Held that officers were not required to administer warnings pursuant to article I section 7 of the Washington constitution as interpreted by prior caselaw -- informing individuals of their right to refuse, limit, or revoke consent -- prior to the warrantless consensual entries onto the defendant's outdoor property for investigative purposes
