Supreme Court Term 2025-2026
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated August 31, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 31, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 28, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 17, 2026
Featured
Massachusetts
Sep 2026
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump
On March 31, 2026, President Trump issued a sweeping Executive Order titled "Ensuring Citizen Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," seeking once again to seize control of election administration from Congress and the states. The Order directs federal agencies to compile lists of U.S. citizens and transmit them to states before every election, directs the U.S. Postal Service -- an independent agency established by Congress -- to create a list of "approved" mail voters, and instructs USPS to refuse to deliver ballots from voters not on that federally created list. If implemented, the Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible citizens to cast their ballots, particularly military members, overseas citizens, the elderly, recently naturalized citizens, and voters with disabilities who rely on mail voting.
Oregon Supreme Court
Aug 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Prisoners' Rights
Zyst v. Miller
Following the Oregon Department of Corrections’ unconstitutional treatment of a transgender prisoner, a habeas court ordered her removal from segregated housing, an individualized gender-affirming care assessment, a psychiatric evaluation, and identification of an appropriate cellmate. However, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the psychiatric-evaluation and cellmate orders, finding them “too attenuated” to qualify as habeas relief. The Ƶ’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the Ƶ of Oregon, joined an amicus brief by the law firm Sugerman Dahab arguing that habeas courts have broad discretion to remedy violations and resulting harms. The brief explains that the Court of Appeals’ “close connection” test unduly constricts habeas relief, and which should be construed to encompass not only the need to halt ongoing constitutional violations, but also the need to mitigate various harms that may arise from those violations.
Florida
Aug 2026
National Security
+2 Issues
CAIR-Foundation, Inc and CAIR Florida, Inc. v. DeSantis et al.
The Ƶ, the Ƶ of Florida, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and their partners represent CAIR and CAIR-Florida in two federal lawsuits challenging Governor DeSantis’s unconstitutional and baseless designation of the nonprofits as “terrorist.” The lawsuits allege violations of CAIR and CAIR-Florida’s rights under the First Amendment and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Court Case
Jul 2026
National Security
Human Rights
FOIA Case Seeking the Trump Administration’s Legal Justification for Deadly Boat Strikes
The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (“OLC”) authored a legal opinion that reportedly claims to justify the Trump administration’s illegal lethal strikes on civilians in boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean. Media reports indicate that, in addition to claiming that the strikes are lawful acts in an alleged “armed conflict” with unspecified drug cartels, the OLC opinion also purports to immunize personnel who authorized or took part in the strikes from future criminal prosecution. Because the public deserves to know how our government is justifying these illegal strikes, and why they think the people who carried them out should not be held accountable, the Ƶ is seeking immediate release of the OLC legal opinion and related documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act.
Arizona
Jul 2026
Prisoners' Rights
Jensen v. Thornell
UPDATE: On July 17, 2026, U.S. District Judge Roslyn O. Silver issued an order formally appointing a receiver to assume control and management of health care provided to more than 25,000 people incarcerated in Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry (ADCRR) prisons, in a long-running lawsuit against the state prison system brought by the Prison Law Office, the Ƶ (Ƶ), Ƶ of Arizona, and Disability Rights Arizona. More details here.
New Hampshire
Jul 2026
Voting Rights
Coalition for Open Democracy v. Scanlan
This lawsuit challenges HB 1569, a new law that will make New Hampshire the only state to require every person to produce documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote for both state and federal elections. It also challenges HB 1569’s elimination a preexisting protection for voters—namely, an affidavit option that allowed voters who faced surprise challenges to their eligibility at the polls to swear to their qualifications and cast a ballot. Accordingly, HB 1569 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution by placing substantial burdens on New Hampshirites at all stages of the voting process, and will arbitrarily disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands of qualified voters.
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2026
Voting Rights
Racial Justice
Allen v. Milligan
Whether Alabama’s congressional districts violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act because they discriminate against Black voters. We succeeded in winning a new map for 2024 elections which, for the first time, has two congressional district that provide Black voters a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choosing despite multiple attempts by Alabama to stop us at the Supreme Court. Despite this win, Alabama is still defending its discriminatory map, and a trial was held in February 2025 to determine the map for the rest of the decade.
In May 2025, a federal court ruled that Alabama's 2023 congressional map both violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and was enacted by the Alabama Legislature with racially discriminatory intent.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2026
Voting Rights
Louisiana v. Callais (Callais v. Landry)
Whether the congressional map Louisiana adopted to cure a Voting Rights Act violation in Robinson v. Ardoin is itself unlawful as a gerrymander.
Tennessee Supreme Court
Apr 2026
Capital Punishment
Tony Von Carruthers v. State of Tennessee
Tennessee plans to execute Tony Carruthers on May 21 even though they refuse to run a simple fingerprint comparison and DNA testing that could prove what Tony has been arguing for 30 years - that he is innocent of this crime and that Tennessee convicted and sentenced the wrong man to death.
All Cases
1,743 Court Cases
New Hampshire
Sep 2026
Privacy & Technology
LaValley v. Concord Housing and Redevelopment Authority
On September 2, 2026, the Ƶ, Ƶ of New Hampshire and New Hampshire Legal Assistance brought a class action lawsuit against the Concord Housing and Redevelopment Authority for installing and operating surveillance devices in tenants’ apartments. The devices collected hundreds of millions of data points recording movement, sound levels, and other information from inside tenants’ homes.
Explore case
New Hampshire
Sep 2026
Privacy & Technology
LaValley v. Concord Housing and Redevelopment Authority
On September 2, 2026, the Ƶ, Ƶ of New Hampshire and New Hampshire Legal Assistance brought a class action lawsuit against the Concord Housing and Redevelopment Authority for installing and operating surveillance devices in tenants’ apartments. The devices collected hundreds of millions of data points recording movement, sound levels, and other information from inside tenants’ homes.
Alabama
Sep 2026
Reproductive Freedom
Oasis Family Birthing Center et. al. v. Alabama Department of Public Health
A group of midwives and doctors filed a lawsuit in state court challenging actions by the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH), which imposed a de facto ban on freestanding birth centers throughout Alabama. Birth centers provide midwifery care to low-risk pregnant patients, a model of care that is proven to be safe and beneficial to patients. Despite that, ADPH took actions that forced one center to abruptly shut down in 2023 despite a perfect safety record, and then passed onerous regulations that would require birth centers to meet hospital-like standards, preventing birth centers from operating in the state. After hearing oral argument in late September 2023, the Circuit Court of Montgomery County granted our request for a Preliminary Injunction on September 30, 2023, preventing ADPH from refusing to timely license freestanding birth centers that comply with nationally-recognized safety standards for birth centers while litigation continues.
In May 2025, the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court issued judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor on Plaintiffs’ threshold claim that freestanding birth centers are not “hospitals” under Alabama law and, therefore, the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) has no authority to require them to be licensed as such.
However, on appeal in January 2026, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed the lower court's decision, and in May 2026, the Alabama Supreme Court declined the Plaintiffs’ request for further review, leaving the Civil Appeals Court’s decision in place.
The case now returns to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County where Plaintiffs will continue litigating other claims arguing that, even if ADPH has authority to require licenses for birth centers, the specific licensing rules ADPH adopted for freestanding birth centers unlawfully burden Alabamians’ access to birth center care.
Explore case
Alabama
Sep 2026
Reproductive Freedom
Oasis Family Birthing Center et. al. v. Alabama Department of Public Health
A group of midwives and doctors filed a lawsuit in state court challenging actions by the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH), which imposed a de facto ban on freestanding birth centers throughout Alabama. Birth centers provide midwifery care to low-risk pregnant patients, a model of care that is proven to be safe and beneficial to patients. Despite that, ADPH took actions that forced one center to abruptly shut down in 2023 despite a perfect safety record, and then passed onerous regulations that would require birth centers to meet hospital-like standards, preventing birth centers from operating in the state. After hearing oral argument in late September 2023, the Circuit Court of Montgomery County granted our request for a Preliminary Injunction on September 30, 2023, preventing ADPH from refusing to timely license freestanding birth centers that comply with nationally-recognized safety standards for birth centers while litigation continues.
In May 2025, the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court issued judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor on Plaintiffs’ threshold claim that freestanding birth centers are not “hospitals” under Alabama law and, therefore, the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) has no authority to require them to be licensed as such.
However, on appeal in January 2026, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed the lower court's decision, and in May 2026, the Alabama Supreme Court declined the Plaintiffs’ request for further review, leaving the Civil Appeals Court’s decision in place.
The case now returns to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County where Plaintiffs will continue litigating other claims arguing that, even if ADPH has authority to require licenses for birth centers, the specific licensing rules ADPH adopted for freestanding birth centers unlawfully burden Alabamians’ access to birth center care.
Mississippi
Sep 2026
Voting Rights
Foster v. State of Mississippi
Whether Black voters will have a fair opportunity to elect judges in DeSoto County, Mississippi.
Explore case
Mississippi
Sep 2026
Voting Rights
Foster v. State of Mississippi
Whether Black voters will have a fair opportunity to elect judges in DeSoto County, Mississippi.
Court Case
Sep 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Jackson-Edney v. Labrador
Six transgender residents of Idaho filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging HB 752, a 2026 state law that criminalizes their use of sex-designated public restrooms consistent with their gender identity.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Jackson-Edney v. Labrador
Six transgender residents of Idaho filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging HB 752, a 2026 state law that criminalizes their use of sex-designated public restrooms consistent with their gender identity.
New York
Sep 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Coe v. Blanche
Three New York families with adolescent transgender children and two transgender New Yorkers filed a class action lawsuit to protect patient identifying and sensitive health information from being turned over to the Department of Justice in response to federal grand jury subpoenas issued as part of a widespread effort to "end” necessary health care for transgender adolescents.
Explore case
New York
Sep 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Coe v. Blanche
Three New York families with adolescent transgender children and two transgender New Yorkers filed a class action lawsuit to protect patient identifying and sensitive health information from being turned over to the Department of Justice in response to federal grand jury subpoenas issued as part of a widespread effort to "end” necessary health care for transgender adolescents.