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 August 2025.
Featured Cases
McDougle v. Scott
Virginia Supreme Court, in a split decision, nullified a constitutional amendment approved by voters that would have redrawn the state's congressional districts, finding the legislative process used for the amendment violated the state constitution
Hoke County Board of Education v. State of North Carolina
The North Carolina Supreme Court overturned its own precedent and put an end to more than 30 years of litigation involving the funding of public education in the state
Commonwealth v. Lee
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that mandating a life sentence, without the possibility of parole, for “felony murder” — a legal doctrine that allows someone to be prosecuted for murder for any death that occurs during the commission of a separate felony, even if the defendant never meant to kill anyone — violates the Pennsylvania Constitution’s ban on “cruel” punishments
Gatehouse Media Ohio Holdings v. City of Columbus Police Department
Ohio Supreme Court ruled officers shot at by a suspect they ultimately killed in return fire are crime victims entitled to privacy right in Ohio's Marsy's Law amendment and redacting their identities does not violate any general state constitutional right to access public records
Lyon v. Riverside Methodist Hospital
Ohio Court of Appeals held that a law capping noneconomic damages for medical malpractice claims does not facially violate state constitutional due process or equal protection, but did violate those guarantees as applied to the plaintiff whose award was signficantly reduced for extreme injuries.
Mohebali v. Hayes
North Carolina Court of Appeals held that a law capping jury awards of noneconomic damages for medical malpractice did not violate the state constitutional jury trial right of a plaintiff who sued her physician for negligence for allowing her pregnancy to extend to 44-weeks, resulting in fetal death.
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
Singleton v. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
A doctor challenges a law that requires healthcare providers to obtain a “certificate of need” before offering new services or facilities in a geographic area
City of Cincinnati, ex rel. Mark Miller v. City of Cincinnati
Ohio Supreme Court will consider whether lower court erred in reading additional taxpayer standing requirements into a statute permitting taxpayers to sue on a city's behalf to stop abuses of municipal power if the city fails to pursue the action itself
People v. Bankston
California Supreme Court will consider whether the state constitution limits relief available under the state's racial justice act, particularly with respect to death penalty eligibility, if a defendant establishes racial bias was exhibited at trial
Arnold v. Kotek
Oregon Supreme Court will consider whether a voter-approved ballot measure requiring a permit process to be eligible to purchase a gun and completion of a background check before any transfer, as well as banning large-capacity magazines, violates the state constitutional right to bear arms.
State v. Kelliher
Held that a de facto life sentence for a juvenile defendant whom a trial court deemed “neither incorrigible nor irredeemable” violates the state constitution
Raftery v. State Board of Retirement
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that forfeiture of pension benefits required by state law when a state employee is convicted of violating laws applicable to his office did not violate the excessive fines or “cruel or unusual” punishment clause.
