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Supreme Court held that an 1849 law, which a local prosecutor had claimed was a near-total abortion ban, is impliedly repealed as to abortion by subsequent legislation and does not ban the procedure in the state.
In Re the State of Texas
The State of Texas requested that a Harris County guaranteed income program in that would use federal funds to disburse $500 cash payments (monthly, for 18 months) to 2,000 low-income county residents be paused as a lawsuit over the program proceeds in the trial court. The Texas Supreme Court issued a temporary injunction.
In re Covid-related Restrictions on Religious Services
Delaware Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of clergy members’ challenge to restrictions on religious gatherings during the Covid-19 pandemic, finding plaintiffs did not establish irreparable harm for injunctive relief or standing for their declaratory claim, and the governor was immune from the damages claim.
Kanahele v. State
Held that the state's transfer of control over a mountain access road constituted a breach of its constitutional duty to carry out the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act
State of Washington v. Luthi
Held that an in-court holding cell, even during pretrial hearings when a jury is not present, undermines the presumption of innocence, limits defendants’ ability to confer confidentially with counsel, and is contrary to the “formal dignity” of the courtroom and treating defendants’ respectfully.
People v. Watkins
Held that defense counsel's decision to forgo a request for a cross-racial identification charge did not constitute an “egregious” single error that rose to level of constitutionally ineffective assistance
Fearrington v. City of Greenville
Ruled that an Act governing red light cameras in a city did not violate the Fines and Forfeitures Clause of the North Carolina Constitution
Independent School District No. 12 v. State of Oklahoma
Ruled in a unanimous decision, against the state board and instructed it to dismiss the enforcement proceedings it brought against a district school library over certain books that allegedly violated new state board rules against sexualized content.
State v. Brown
Held that the defendant had a legitimate, reasonable expectation of privacy when he spoke with his mother in police station interview room under both the Fourth Amendment and Rhode Island's right against self-incrimination
Texas Department of Transportation v. Self
Held that the government must pay compensation to the landowners when it intentionally destroys private property for public use, even when it acted with the mistaken belief that it has a legal right to do so
Thurston v. The League of Women Voters of Arkansas
Held that Acts placing restrictions on absentee ballots and requiring valid photographic identification to cast a ballot did not clearly violate state constitutional provisions guaranteeing equal protection and free and equal elections
