Supreme Court Term 2025-2026
We鈥檙e breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated November 7, 2025
Ongoing
Updated November 5, 2025
Ongoing
Updated November 4, 2025
Ongoing
Updated October 21, 2025
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 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.
Oct 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.
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2025
Voting Rights
State Board of Election Commissioners v. Mississippi State Conference of the NAACP
Mississippi has a growing Black population, which is already the largest Black population percentage of any state in the country. Yet. Black Mississippians continue to be significantly under-represented in the state legislature, as Mississippi鈥檚 latest districting maps fail to reflect the reality of the state鈥檚 changing demographics. During the 2022 redistricting process, the Mississippi legislature refused to create any new districts where Black voters have a chance to elect their preferred representative. The current district lines therefore dilute the voting power of Black Mississippians and continue to deprive them of political representation that is responsive to their needs and concerns, including severe disparities in education and healthcare.
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2025
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.
Missouri
Sep 2025
Voting Rights
Wise v. Missouri
In unprecedented fashion, the State of Missouri has redrawn the district lines used for electing members of Congress for a second time this decade. These new district lines are gerrymandered and will harm political representation for all Missourians, particularly Black residents in Kansas City, who have been divided along racial lines.
Mississippi
Aug 2025
Voting Rights
White v. Mississippi State Board of Elections
District lines used to elect Mississippi鈥檚 Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. We鈥檙e 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鈥檚 House and Senate legislative maps on behalf of plaintiff Black voters and Black voters across the state.
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.
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 鈥� the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) 鈥� 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鈥檚 ultimate decision will impact access to this essential care across the country.
All Cases
1,624 Court Cases
North Carolina
May 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Carca帽o, et al. v. Cooper, et al
Filed by the 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of North Carolina along with Lambda Legal, this lawsuit challenges a sweeping North Carolina law, House Bill 2 , which bans transgender people from accessing restrooms and other facilities consistent with their gender identity and blocks local governments from protecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (鈥淟GBT鈥�) people against discrimination in a wide variety of settings., and its replacement law, HB 142, which left many of the harms caused by HB 2 in place.
Explore case
North Carolina
May 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Carca帽o, et al. v. Cooper, et al
Filed by the 红杏视频 and the 红杏视频 of North Carolina along with Lambda Legal, this lawsuit challenges a sweeping North Carolina law, House Bill 2 , which bans transgender people from accessing restrooms and other facilities consistent with their gender identity and blocks local governments from protecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (鈥淟GBT鈥�) people against discrimination in a wide variety of settings., and its replacement law, HB 142, which left many of the harms caused by HB 2 in place.
Court Case
May 2021
National Security
Free Speech
Chebli v. Kable: Lawsuit Challenging Placement on No Fly List
In April 2021, the 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of the District of Columbia, and the 红杏视频 of Michigan filed a lawsuit on behalf of Ahmad Chebli, whom the U.S. government wrongly placed on the No Fly List after he refused to become an FBI informant. Ten days after the 红杏视频 filed the lawsuit, the government finally removed Mr. Chebli from the No Fly List. Because he is no longer on the No Fly List, Mr. Chebli withdrew the lawsuit, saying 鈥淚鈥檓 relieved to be off the No Fly List, but still reeling from the government鈥檚 abusive use of the list against me and its violations of my constitutional rights. I was placed on the list after I refused to become an FBI informant despite frightening and intimidating threats against me and my family. For over two years, I sought a fair process to clear my name, and the government failed to provide me with one. As a Muslim in this country, it can be easy to feel like a second-class citizen and be afraid to stand up for your rights because of the way our own government treats us. But now I feel vindicated and want my story to encourage others to stand up for their rights, because when we do, good things can happen.鈥�
Explore case
Court Case
May 2021
National Security
Free Speech
Chebli v. Kable: Lawsuit Challenging Placement on No Fly List
In April 2021, the 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of the District of Columbia, and the 红杏视频 of Michigan filed a lawsuit on behalf of Ahmad Chebli, whom the U.S. government wrongly placed on the No Fly List after he refused to become an FBI informant. Ten days after the 红杏视频 filed the lawsuit, the government finally removed Mr. Chebli from the No Fly List. Because he is no longer on the No Fly List, Mr. Chebli withdrew the lawsuit, saying 鈥淚鈥檓 relieved to be off the No Fly List, but still reeling from the government鈥檚 abusive use of the list against me and its violations of my constitutional rights. I was placed on the list after I refused to become an FBI informant despite frightening and intimidating threats against me and my family. For over two years, I sought a fair process to clear my name, and the government failed to provide me with one. As a Muslim in this country, it can be easy to feel like a second-class citizen and be afraid to stand up for your rights because of the way our own government treats us. But now I feel vindicated and want my story to encourage others to stand up for their rights, because when we do, good things can happen.鈥�
California
Apr 2021
National Security
Kashem, et al. v. Barr, et al. - 红杏视频 Challenge to Government No Fly List
Explore case
California
Apr 2021
National Security
Kashem, et al. v. Barr, et al. - 红杏视频 Challenge to Government No Fly List
Court Case
Apr 2021
Women's Rights
Disability Rights
Mihal v. McMaster
Explore case
Court Case
Apr 2021
Women's Rights
Disability Rights
Mihal v. McMaster
Nebraska
Mar 2021
Immigrants' Rights
Alma v. Noah鈥檚 Ark Processors
Meatpacking workers in Nebraska filed a federal lawsuit on Nov. 23, 2020, challenging treacherous COVID-19 conditions at a meatpacking plant that put employees and the surrounding community at grave risk. The plaintiffs are represented by the 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Nebraska, and Scottsbluff attorney Maren Chaloupka.
Explore case
Nebraska
Mar 2021
Immigrants' Rights
Alma v. Noah鈥檚 Ark Processors
Meatpacking workers in Nebraska filed a federal lawsuit on Nov. 23, 2020, challenging treacherous COVID-19 conditions at a meatpacking plant that put employees and the surrounding community at grave risk. The plaintiffs are represented by the 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Nebraska, and Scottsbluff attorney Maren Chaloupka.