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
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Supreme Court held that an 1849 law, which a local prosecutor had claimed was a near-total abortion ban, is impliedly repealed as to abortion by subsequent legislation and does not ban the procedure in the state.
Contoocook Valley School District v. New Hampshire
The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the state's existing education funding law is constitutionally inadequate and $7,356.01 per pupil as a minimum constitutional guidepost for the legislature, but reversed the trial court's injunction directing the state immediately to pay that amount because the court failed to give adequate weight to separation of powers concerns.
Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers v. State of Missouri
Asking the court to declare unconstitutional and block enforcement of Missouri’s ban on abortion, its ban on the use of telemedicine for abortion, the 72-hour waiting period for the procedure, and multiple other restrictive abortion-related laws.
Isaacson v. Arizona
Healthcare providers seek to block enforcement of remaining abortion restrictions, including an in-person pre-procedure visit requirement, 24-hour waiting period, and telemedicine ban for medication abortions, on the basis that they violate a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion.
Doe v. Uthmeier
A 17-year-old petitioned for a judicial waiver so that she may consent to an abortion without parental notification and consent. A Florida intermediate appellate court held that the judicial waiver law, which allows parental consent to be bypassed upon certain trial court findings, violates parents' due process rights. Anticipating Florida Supreme Court review, the intermediate court certified the question of the law's constitutionality to the state high court.
Birthmark Doula Collective v. State of Louisiana
Reproductive healthcare providers and advocates challenge a state law that reclassifies mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances, arguing that the law unconstitutionally regulates and delays access to medications that people need for non-abortion reasons, often for emergencies such as postpartum hemorrhage, simply because those medications may also be used for an abortion. They allege the law violates the state constitution's equal protection clause and single-subject and germane-amendment rules.
Access Independent Health Services v. Wrigley
Will consider whether trial court erred in striking down near-total abortion ban on bases that the law violates a woman's fundamental right to obtain an abortion pre-viability and the exceptions are unconstitutionally vague. The North Dakota Supreme Court previously refused to stay the trial court ruling, finding at that juncture that the state had not shown it was likely to prevail on appeal.
Blackmon v. State
Plaintiffs who allege they were denied, or received delayed, medically necessary abortion care due to doctors' confusion regarding the scope of the medical necessity exception in the state's abortion ban challenge that exception as violating their state constitutional rights to life and equal protection and as unconstitutionally vague. A Tennessee trial court held the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits as to each challenge, at least with respect to certain maternal medical conditions the parties agreed fall within the exception, and granted temporary relief declaring the exception to include those conditions.
SisterSong v. Georgia
Plaintiffs claim that abortion ban violates the state constitution’s right to liberty and privacy and guarantee of equal protection
Individual Members of the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana v. Anonymous Plaintiff 1
Appellate court upheld a temporary injunction against Indiana's 2022 abortion ban based on religious freedom claims, but held the injunction was overly broad because it enjoined enforcement of the abortion law in ways that did not violate the state's religious freedom act. Remanded for entry of a narrower injunction. Indiana Supreme Court did not take up an appeal of the appellate court ruling, leaving it in place.
Johnson v. Wyoming
Plaintiffs claim that abortion ban violates the fundamental right to be left alone by government as guaranteed by several rights enshrined in the state constitution
Preterm-Cleveland v. Yost
Filed, by abortion providers, a lawsuit claiming the state’s abortion restrictions, including a 24-hour waiting period to receive abortion care, violate the state constitution’s right to reproductive freedom.
