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.
Askew v. City of Kinston
Held that plaintiffs bringing direct actions under the state constitution are not required to exhaust administrative remedies before filing suit.
State v. White
Ruled that the state constitution's confrontation clause requires two-way visibility between the accused and witnesses during testimony.
In re Harris
Held that a judge may consider proffered inadmissible evidence to support denial of bail without violating due process principles so long as the evidence is reliable
Kaul v. Urmanski
Agreed to hear challenges to a 175-year-old law that conservatives claim bans abortion. A lower court said that law did not outlaw abortions. The high court will consider if it does and, if so, if it is still enforceable on an appeal brought by a Republican Wisconsin county attorney.
Surface Water Use Permit Applications
Vacated the Water Commission’s decision regarding interim instream flow standards for failure to comply with the state constitution's public trust doctrine and remanded for further proceedings.
Hodes & Nauser v. Kobach; Hodes & Nauser v. Stanek
Affirmed district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of health care providers and said that a near-total ban on a common method of second trimester abortion, called a dilation and evacuation, violated the section 1 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights, which protects a right to personal autonomy. In a second opinion, applying strict scrutiny, found unconstitutional additional licensing requirements for physicians who provide abortions than required for other providers.
Foresman v. Foresman
The Hawaii Supreme Court will consider a law that reopened civil claims “based upon sexual acts” with a minor “that constituted or would have constituted a criminal offense” under certain statutes. At issue is whether the law can impose liability for acts that were not crimes when they were committed without violating federal and state constitutional bars against retroactive application of punishment.
In re State
Granted motion for temporary injunction, prohibiting the County’s plan to use federal funds for $500 monthly cash payments to residents because it could violate the state constitution's prohibition on gratuitous payments
State v. Autele
Held that trial courts have discretion to determine whether the state constitutional right to be represented by retained counsel of choice is outweighed by other considerations, including ethical requirements or the potential for undue delay and disruption of trial
Commonwealth v. Lee
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court will decide whether 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 or the federal Eighth Amendment.
