Supreme Court Term 2024-2025
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated July 29, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 25, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 24, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 21, 2025
Featured
Mississippi
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
White v. Mississippi State Board of Elections
District lines used to elect Mississippi’s Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. We’re suing because this dilutes the voting strength of Black residents in state Supreme Court elections, in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution.
Louisiana
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
Nairne v. Landry
Nairne v. Landry poses a challenge under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to Louisiana’s House and Senate legislative maps on behalf of plaintiff Black voters and Black voters across the state.
Washington, D.C.
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump
On March 25, 2025, in a sweeping and unprecedented Executive Order, President Trump attempted to usurp the power to regulate federal elections from Congress and the States. Among other things, the Executive Order directs the Election Assistance Commission—an agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent—to require voters to show a passport or other citizenship documentation in order to register to vote in federal elections. If implemented, the Executive Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible Americans to register and vote and upend the administration of federal elections.
On behalf of leading voter registration organizations and advocacy organizations, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
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.
Ohio
Jul 2025
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the law firm WilmerHale, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm, on behalf of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Preterm-Cleveland, Women’s Med Group Professional Corporation, Dr. Sharon Liner, and Julia Quinn, MSN, BSN, amended a complaint in an existing lawsuit against a ban on telehealth medication abortion services to bring new claims under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment, including additional challenges to other laws in Ohio that restrict access to medication abortion in the state.
Georgia Supreme Court
Jun 2025
Voting Rights
Eternal Vigilance Action, Inc. v. Georgia
The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ and partner organizations intervened in this case to represent the rights of voters and voting-rights organizations in a case challenging a number of rules passed by the Georgia State Election Board. We challenged the rule requiring that the number of votes cast be hand counted at the polling place prior to the tabulation of votes. In a critical victory for Georgia voters, in June 2025, the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation — a process widely criticized for risking delays, ballot spoliation, and voter disenfranchisement.
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2025
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.
South Carolina Supreme Court
Jan 2025
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
This case involves a state constitutional challenge to South Carolina’s 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state’s federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state’s Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States
Idaho and Moyle, et al. v. United States was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Idaho politicians seeking to disregard a federal statute — the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) — and put doctors in jail for providing pregnant patients necessary emergency medical care. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this case on April 24, 2024. The Court’s ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
All Cases
1,603 Court Cases
Court Case
Sep 2021
Women's Rights
Freyer v. Frontier and Hodgkins v. Frontier
The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Colorado, and the law firm Holwell Shuster & Goldberg LLP, and Towards Justice filed two companion lawsuits on behalf of eight pilots and flight attendants at Frontier Airlines in Colorado for failing to provide accommodations related to pregnancy and breastfeeding. The complaint challenges Frontier’s discriminatory policies and practices of penalizing pregnancy-related absences, refusing to provide accommodations to pregnant and breastfeeding pilots and flight attendants, and prohibiting breast pumping while on duty.
Explore case
Court Case
Sep 2021
Women's Rights
Freyer v. Frontier and Hodgkins v. Frontier
The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Colorado, and the law firm Holwell Shuster & Goldberg LLP, and Towards Justice filed two companion lawsuits on behalf of eight pilots and flight attendants at Frontier Airlines in Colorado for failing to provide accommodations related to pregnancy and breastfeeding. The complaint challenges Frontier’s discriminatory policies and practices of penalizing pregnancy-related absences, refusing to provide accommodations to pregnant and breastfeeding pilots and flight attendants, and prohibiting breast pumping while on duty.
Maryland
Sep 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Stone v. Trump
The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Maryland, and Covington & Burling LLP filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on behalf of six members of the armed forces who are transgender and the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Maryland. The lawsuit challenges the president’s directive banning transgender service members from continuing to serve in the military, banning transgender service members from receiving certain medically necessary health care, and banning transgender individuals from enlisting in the armed forces.
Explore case
Maryland
Sep 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Stone v. Trump
The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Maryland, and Covington & Burling LLP filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on behalf of six members of the armed forces who are transgender and the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of Maryland. The lawsuit challenges the president’s directive banning transgender service members from continuing to serve in the military, banning transgender service members from receiving certain medically necessary health care, and banning transgender individuals from enlisting in the armed forces.
Virginia
Sep 2021
Voting Rights
Adkins v. Virginia Redistricting Commission (Amicus)
Explore case
Virginia
Sep 2021
Voting Rights
Adkins v. Virginia Redistricting Commission (Amicus)
Florida
Sep 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Prisoners' Rights
Barnett v. Tony
Decarceration has always been an emergency, a life and death proposition, but COVID-19 makes this effort intensely urgent. The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ has been working with our partners to litigate for the rights of those who are incarcerated and cannot protect themselves because of the policies of the institutions in which they are jailed.
Explore case
Florida
Sep 2021
Criminal Law Reform
Prisoners' Rights
Barnett v. Tony
Decarceration has always been an emergency, a life and death proposition, but COVID-19 makes this effort intensely urgent. The ºìÐÓÊÓƵ has been working with our partners to litigate for the rights of those who are incarcerated and cannot protect themselves because of the policies of the institutions in which they are jailed.
South Carolina
Sep 2021
Racial Justice
White v. Shwedo
In the latest front in the nationwide fight against the criminalization of poverty, on October 31, 2019, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of South Carolina, Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC, Southern Poverty Law Center, and South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s policy of automatically suspending the driver’s licenses of people with unpaid traffic tickets. The South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles does not ensure that people who cannot pay will not lose their licenses in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of due process and equal protection under the law. South Carolina’s wealth-based license suspensions impact more than 190,000 people, funneling those who are unable to pay, particularly poor people of color, deep into cycles of poverty, job loss, traffic violations, and entanglement with the legal system.
Explore case
South Carolina
Sep 2021
Racial Justice
White v. Shwedo
In the latest front in the nationwide fight against the criminalization of poverty, on October 31, 2019, the ºìÐÓÊÓƵ, ºìÐÓÊÓƵ of South Carolina, Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC, Southern Poverty Law Center, and South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina’s policy of automatically suspending the driver’s licenses of people with unpaid traffic tickets. The South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles does not ensure that people who cannot pay will not lose their licenses in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s promise of due process and equal protection under the law. South Carolina’s wealth-based license suspensions impact more than 190,000 people, funneling those who are unable to pay, particularly poor people of color, deep into cycles of poverty, job loss, traffic violations, and entanglement with the legal system.