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 June 2025.
Featured Cases
League of Women Voters of Utah v. Utah State Legislature (LWV 1)
Utah Supreme Court dismissed legislators' appeal from trial court ruling that struck the state's congressional map. Lower court said law the map was enacted under violated a fundamental right of voters to alter or reform their government — recognized by the Utah high court earlier in the case — by repealing a redistricting-reform initiative, and subsequently adopted plaintiffs' proposed alternative map
Commonwealth v. Council for Better Education; LaFontaine v. Council for Better Education
Kentucky Supreme Court ruled that a law providing for charter schools funds education outside the “system of common schools,” in violation of clauses requiring the legislature to establish such a system and voters to approve such funding
McDougle v. Nardo
Virginia Supreme Court permitted legislature's proposed amendment to redraw the state’s congressional map to proceed to a vote, while it considers appeal of trial court decision finding the legislative process unconstitutional
State v. City of San Antonio
Court of Appeals blocked a city from distributing payments under a $100,000 fund created to cover reproductive healthcare costs, which may include out-of-state travel for abortion care, while a full appeal is pending. Preliminarily held the fund violates the state constitution's gift clause because sending residents to undergo procedures out of state that Texas prohibits within the state does not count as a public purpose. Although the city had not yet disbursed any money and argued it still had the option to choose not to pay for out-of-state abortion travel, the panel found it sufficiently likely such payment would occur for the dispute to be ripe.
State v. Amble
Iowa Supreme Court revisited its 2021 decision in State v. Wright that the state's search and seizure clause requires police to obtain a warrant before searching garbage placed curbside for collection, finding that subsequent enactment of a state statute providing such garbage "shall be deemed abandoned property" means a warrant is no longer constitutionally required. The majority reasoned that Wright relied on "positive law" -- a local anti-scavening ordinance prohibiting anyone but licensed trash collectors from picking up trash -- to define private property rights, and the state statute changed that positive law by preempting the local ordinance. A dissent opined that the majority's position allows legislative "end-runs" of constitutional rights and disregards an overarching reasonable-expectation-of-privacy analysis.
State v. Green
Tennessee Supreme Court held that, following the state's legalization of hemp, a positive alert from a drug-detecting dog incapable of distinguishing between the smell of legal hemp and illegal marijuana could still contribute to a probable cause finding to support a vehicle search.
Josh Kaul v. Wisconsin State Legislature
Wisconsin Supreme Court held a law giving a legislative committee authority to approve or disprove civil settlements reached by the state justice department violates separation of powers as applied to civil enforcement actions and civil cases brought on behalf of executive agencies. Settling these types of actions is within the core power of the executive branch, as the legislature has failed to demonstrate that doing so implicates an institutional interest giving lawmakers a shared constitutional role.
State v. Spencer
Illinois Supreme Court held that an aggregate 100-year prison sentence for a defendant who was 20 when the crimes occurred is not a de facto life sentence because a state statute makes first-degree murder defendants under 21 eligible for parole after 20 years and mandates that the reviewing board consider mitigating circumstances related to the defendant’s youth. The court further held that the the fact the sentence is not de facto life does not foreclose the defendant from bringing an as-applied challenge to his sentence under the state constitution’s “proportionate penalties” clause in a post-conviction petition.
Montana Environmental Information Center v. Office of the Governor
Montana Supreme Court held that a party who succeeds on a state constitutional “right to know” claim in a public records dispute is entitled to a presumption that they should be awarded attorneys’ fees. Two dissents opined that the holding was motivated by partisan bias.
Center for Arizona Policy v. Arizona Secretary of State
Arizona Supreme Court will consider allegations that a campaign-disclosure law violates state constitutional rights to free speech and not to be disturbed in "private affairs," as well as separation of powers. Lower courts dismissed the claims.
Baxter v. Philadelphia Board of Elections
Pennsylvania Supreme Court will consider whether it violates the state constitution's "free and equal" elections clause not to count a mail ballot because the voter failed to comply with a state law requiring the date to be handwritten on the ballot's outer envelope.
Schwartz v. Washington County
Will consider whether statutes that establish state tobacco retail licenses and that authorize licensees to sell tobacco products and vaping devices preempt a county ordinance that prohibits the sale of flavored tobacco products and vapes. An intermediate court found the statutes did not preempt the county ordinance.
Paxton v. Annunciation House
Texas Supreme Court held that a clause empowering the state attorney general to seek judicial forfeiture of corporate charters permits him to bring a quo warranto action to shut down a Catholic charity based on allegations it violated a state law against harboring undocumented immigrants. The state's religious freedom restoration act does not bar the claim from being filed, and the law is neither unconstitutionally vague nor precluded by federal immigration law. Remanded the case to the trial court for further proceedings on the merits.
