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 May 2025.
Featured Cases
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
South Carolina Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims are nonjusticiable political questions, which state courts cannot review, under the state constitution.
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.
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.
Tatum v. Commissioner of Corrections
Held that a new constitutional rule of criminal procedure applies retroactively under certain conditions and principles regarding the admissibility of eyewitness identification evidence apply retroactively
Wygant v. Lee
The Tennessee Supreme Court will consider a lawsuit brought by voters challenging state house districts passed by the legislature in 2022. The plaintiffs contend that the districts violate a state constitutional provision barring districts from dividing counties. The defendants argue that the court does not have the power to resolve the claims because such challenges are purely political questions to be left to the legislature.
State v. Diole
Held that subjecting incompetent defendants to a determination of whether they committed the acts charged without a jury trial, the protections of medical privilege, and the safeguards of the rules of evidence did not violate due process and equal protection
Lake v. Hobbs
Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed lower court’s dismissal of claims made by Kari Lake seeking to overturn the 2022 gubernatorial election, which she lost, based on alleged election administration errors. The Arizona Supreme Court denied her petition for review.
Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State of Montana (Planned Parenthood 2)
Ruled that minors have a fundamental right to privacy and do not have to seek parental permission to get an abortion in the state.
Williams v. Powell
Held that statutes criminalizing acts likely to prevent or disrupt the General Assembly and criminalizing intentionally disruptive or disorderly conduct at state capital were neither facially overbroad nor facially vague
State v. Hoyle
Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeals's grant of new trial, finding that prosecutor did not unlawfully comment on defendant's exercise of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. On remand, Court of Appeals rejected defendant's other bases for overturning his conviction, finding no reasonable probability that newly discovered evidence would have changed the jury's verdict and evidence the prosecution did not disclose to be immaterial. The Wisconsin high court denied defendant's subsequent petition for review.
Watson Memorial Spiritual Temple of Christ v. Korban
Ruled that mandamus was an appropriate vehicle for landowners to collect from the city's sewerage and water board inverse-condemnation damages awarded in prior suit
Stefanik v. Hochul
Upheld New York's universal early mail voting law. The state high court disagreed that a state constitutional clause expressly authorizing absentee voting for specific categories of people should be interpreted to prevent mail-in voting by all others, based on the presumption of constitutionality for state laws, the constitutional history, and another clause allowing the legislature to authorize the "method" of elections.
Singleton v. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
A doctor is challenging a law that requires healthcare providers to obtain a “certificate of need” before offering new services or facilities in a geographic area
