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
Black Voters Matter v. Byrd
Florida Supreme Court upheld the state's 2022 congressional map against voting rights groups' challenge that it diminishes Black voters' ability to elect candidates of their choice in violation of a 2010 amendment, finding the plaintiffs had not proven the possibility of drawing a remedial map that complies with the federal equal protection clause.
Evers v. Marklein
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that statutes permitting a legislative committee to pause, object to, or suspend administrative rules for varying periods of time both before and after promulgation — used by the committee in this case effectively to block for three years a rule banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ patients — facially violate the state constitution’s bicameralism and presentment requirements.
Kaul v. Urmanski
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an 1849 law, which a local prosecutor had claimed was a near-total abortion ban, is impliedly repealed as to abortion by subsequent legislation and does not ban the procedure in the state.
Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Simmons
Reversed trial court injunction that had ordered Indiana's bureau of motor vehicles to allow a non-binary gender marker on drivers' licenses, finding that the agency's binary-only policy triggers rational-basis review under the federal equal protection clause and does not infringe federal substantive due process.
Eidson v. South Carolina Department of Education
Held that state program providing taxpayer-funded education accounts to low-income families cannot be allocated by parents to private school tuition because doing so violates a state constitutional ban on use of public funds for the “direct benefit” of private educational institutions.
Acorn International v. State
Held that the Secretary of State's response to ACORN International's public records request asking for documentation of the actual costs for a yearly subscription to state voter database did not violate organization's constitutional right to know
Oberholzer v. Galapo
Held that neighbors' anti-racist signs did not intolerably intrude on homeowners' substantial privacy interests, and thus constitutional free-speech protections did not permit trial court to enjoin continued display of the signs
Francisco v. Affiliated Urologists
Held that statutes requiring the patient to obtain expert testimony to establish the requisite standard of care in the patient's negligence action did not violate the anti-abrogation clause, despite the patient's allegations that no expert would testify
State v. Chadwick
Held that in multiple acts case when counts charged are identical, the jury must be specifically instructed that it must be unanimous regarding both the conduct supporting conviction on each count and the defendant's guilt
Jenkins v. Beaver County
Held that the mail-in ballot postmark statute did not result in an unequal treatment of voters or interfere with the constitutional right to vote
State v. Baugh
Held that defendant’s counsel rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance by failing to request jury instructions on its duty to be unanimous as to each element of each convicted count
Satcher v. Columbia County
Held that the injunction entered against county, preventing it from maintaining a defective stormwater drainage system, exceeded the scope of the sovereign immunity waiver
Sports Medicine Research & Testing Lab. v. Board of Equalization of Salt Lake County
Held that taxpayer's use of facility to perform market-rate testing for professional sports organizations did not serve a charitable purpose and taxpayer was not entitled to tax exemption
