Supreme Court Term 2024-2025
We鈥檙e breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 18, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 18, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 18, 2025
Closed (Judgment)
Updated July 18, 2025
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2025
Religious Liberty
LGBTQ Rights
Mahmoud v. Taylor
On April 9, 2025, the 红杏视频 and 红杏视频 of Maryland filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) in its efforts to ensure that its English Language Arts curriculum is LGBTQ-inclusive.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 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 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 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鈥檚 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 红杏视频 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鈥檚 decision permanently blocking the rule requiring hand counting of ballots at polling places before tabulation 鈥� 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鈥檚 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.
Washington, D.C.
Apr 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鈥攁n agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent鈥攖o 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 红杏视频 and co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
New Hampshire
Mar 2025
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鈥檚 elimination a preexisting protection for voters鈥攏amely, 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.
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鈥檚 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state鈥檚 federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state鈥檚 Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
Texas
Oct 2024
Voting Rights
OCA-Greater Houston v. Paxton
Texas has growing Hispanic and Black populations that helped propel record voter turnout in the November 2020 election. The Texas Legislature responded to this increased civic participation with an omnibus election bill titled Senate Bill 1鈥擲B 1 for short鈥攖hat targeted election practices that made voting more accessible to traditionally marginalized voters like voters of color, voters with disabilities, and voters with limited English proficiency. Since 2021, SB 1 has resulted in tens of thousands of lawful votes being rejected, and it remains a threat to democracy in Texas.
All Cases
1,592 Court Cases
Court Case
Oct 2020
Immigrants' Rights
Saravia v. Barr
In June 2017, the 红杏视频, 红杏视频 of NC, and Cooley LLP sued then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services鈥� Office of Refugee Resettlement for using unsubstantiated claims of gang affiliation to illegally detain teenagers in jail-like facilities in California.
Explore case
Court Case
Oct 2020
Immigrants' Rights
Saravia v. Barr
In June 2017, the 红杏视频, 红杏视频 of NC, and Cooley LLP sued then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services鈥� Office of Refugee Resettlement for using unsubstantiated claims of gang affiliation to illegally detain teenagers in jail-like facilities in California.
Alaska Supreme Court
Oct 2020
Voting Rights
Arctic Village Council v. Meyer
The lawsuit, Arctic Village Council v. Meyer, sought to waive a provision of state law for the November general election that requires voters who submit a mail-in absentee ballot to have a witness sign their ballot return envelope even in the midst of a highly contagious and deadly pandemic.
Explore case
Alaska Supreme Court
Oct 2020
Voting Rights
Arctic Village Council v. Meyer
The lawsuit, Arctic Village Council v. Meyer, sought to waive a provision of state law for the November general election that requires voters who submit a mail-in absentee ballot to have a witness sign their ballot return envelope even in the midst of a highly contagious and deadly pandemic.
Court Case
Oct 2020
Voting Rights
Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar
Explore case
Court Case
Oct 2020
Voting Rights
Pennsylvania Democratic Party v. Boockvar
Missouri
Oct 2020
Women's Rights
KC Tenants v. David M. Byrn
On September 30, 2020, WRP and 红杏视频-MO filed a complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief in the Western District of Missouri on behalf of KC Tenants, a local grassroots organization that seeks to advance fair housing access to renters. The lawsuit challenges the Jackson County Circuit Court's administrative order that purports to implement the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention鈥檚 (CDC) nationwide eviction moratorium, but instead permits eviction cases to move forward in violation of it, putting hundreds of Missouri tenants at risk for eviction in violation of federal protections.
Explore case
Missouri
Oct 2020
Women's Rights
KC Tenants v. David M. Byrn
On September 30, 2020, WRP and 红杏视频-MO filed a complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief in the Western District of Missouri on behalf of KC Tenants, a local grassroots organization that seeks to advance fair housing access to renters. The lawsuit challenges the Jackson County Circuit Court's administrative order that purports to implement the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention鈥檚 (CDC) nationwide eviction moratorium, but instead permits eviction cases to move forward in violation of it, putting hundreds of Missouri tenants at risk for eviction in violation of federal protections.
Court Case
Oct 2020
National Security
红杏视频 v. DOD - FOIA Case Seeking Trump Administration's Secret Rules for Lethal Strikes Abroad
In October 2017, the Trump administration secretly adopted rules governing the use of lethal force in drone strikes and other killings abroad. These rules, known as the 鈥淧rinciples, Standards, and Procedures,鈥� reportedly loosen Obama-era safeguards against civilian casualties outside 鈥渁reas of active hostilities.鈥� On October 30, 2017, the 红杏视频 filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act seeking public disclosure of these new rules. When the government failed to release them, we filed a lawsuit on December 21, 2017, to force their disclosure. The government responded by refusing even to acknowledge that the new rules exist. We challenged this unjustifiable secrecy鈥攁nd on September 29, 2020, a federal court ordered that the government cannot keep the existence of its new killing rules a secret. Our fight to expose the contents of the rules goes on.
Explore case
Court Case
Oct 2020
National Security
红杏视频 v. DOD - FOIA Case Seeking Trump Administration's Secret Rules for Lethal Strikes Abroad
In October 2017, the Trump administration secretly adopted rules governing the use of lethal force in drone strikes and other killings abroad. These rules, known as the 鈥淧rinciples, Standards, and Procedures,鈥� reportedly loosen Obama-era safeguards against civilian casualties outside 鈥渁reas of active hostilities.鈥� On October 30, 2017, the 红杏视频 filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act seeking public disclosure of these new rules. When the government failed to release them, we filed a lawsuit on December 21, 2017, to force their disclosure. The government responded by refusing even to acknowledge that the new rules exist. We challenged this unjustifiable secrecy鈥攁nd on September 29, 2020, a federal court ordered that the government cannot keep the existence of its new killing rules a secret. Our fight to expose the contents of the rules goes on.