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
Johnson v. Wyoming
Wyoming Supreme Court struck down the state's abortion and medication abortion bans for violating a 2012 amendment that granted adults the right to make their own health care decisions
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
Jackson v. Florida
Florida Supreme Court upheld a 2023 law that permits eligible defendants to be sentenced to death on the recommendation of only 8 of 12 jurors
Montana Trout Unlimited v. Montana Department of Natural Resources & Conservation
Held that the exemption of dewatering from the Montana Water Use Act's permitting requirements did not violate the water rights section of the state's constitution
Firearms Owners Against Crime v. Commissioner of Pennsylvania State Police
Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that statute providing for "instantaneous" background checks of prospective gun purchasers requires provision of eligibility determinations as quickly as possible with the resources the agency has available, but found to be waived -- and declined to reach -- state constitutional claims that failing to provide immediate results violates purchasers' and sellers' inherent rights and right to bear arms.
Dupuis v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland
Held that a law that revived claims based on sex acts toward minors that were previously time-barred impairs a defendant's vested right to be free from a claim once its statute of limitations has expired, finding that a prohibition on laws reviving expired claims "runs as a theme" throughout the text of Maine's Constitution.
State v. Francisco Edgar Tirado
Held that North Carolina's "cruel or unusual" punishment clause — construed consistently with a separate state constitutional provision specifying the types of punishment laws may impose, without limitations based on age — would provide less protection against life-without-parole sentences for juveniles than the Eighth Amendment, so must be interpreted in lockstep with the federal "cruel and unusual" punishment clause.
Cherokee Nation v. U.S. Department of the Interior
Held that the governor possesses constitutional and statutory authority to represent the state’s interests in litigation involving tribal gaming contracts, including to choose the counsel who will represent his position. The governor was a named defendant in his official capacity in the underlying litigation, and the state attorney general sought to assume control of defending the state’s interests over the objection of the governor, who had already employed separate counsel to represent the state.
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.
Gotay v. Creen
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a “special relationship” exists between foster children and the state that imposes an affirmative duty on the state to ensure a reasonably safe foster home environment, but found the state defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on the parent and guardian's substantive due process claim.
Texas v. Margaret Daley Carpenter
Texas’s attorney general sued a New York doctor for mailing abortion-including drugs to a woman in Texas, claiming she practiced medicine in Texas without a Texas license and improperly aided an abortion. After the doctor did not respond to the complaint, a Texas trial court issued a default judgment enjoining her from prescribing abortion-inducing drugs to state residents and imposing $100,000 in civil penalties, as sought by the attorney general.
Reuss v. Arizona
Healthcare providers sought to block enforcement of Arizona's 15-week abortion ban on the basis that it violates a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion. On plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the state did not contest, the trial court permanently blocked the ban.
State v. Nelson
Held that community custody conditions requiring the criminal defendant submit to breath analysis and urinalysis testing to monitor compliance with conditions prohibiting use of alcohol and unprescribed drugs were supported by authority of law, and thus were constitutional under art. 1 sec. 7 of the Washington Constitution, regardless of whether they were related to his specific crimes