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 10, 2025
Ongoing
Updated November 7, 2025
Ongoing
Updated November 5, 2025
Ongoing
Updated November 4, 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
1,625 Court Cases
Arizona
Aug 2017
Criminal Law Reform
Cox v. Voyles, et. al.
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Arizona, and the law firm Perkins Coie filed the case in 2015 against the Sheriff, the County Attorney, and other Pinal County, Arizona officials, for their enforcement of Arizona鈥檚 civil asset forfeiture laws.
The defendants filed three motions to dismiss, but a federal court ruled on August 18, 2017, that the claims at the heart of the case can move forward. The judge found that the lawsuit establishes a plausible claim that the state鈥檚 asset forfeiture laws violate due process rights 鈥渂ecause Defendants have a financial incentive to zealously enforce the forfeiture laws.鈥
Explore case
Arizona
Aug 2017
Criminal Law Reform
Cox v. Voyles, et. al.
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Arizona, and the law firm Perkins Coie filed the case in 2015 against the Sheriff, the County Attorney, and other Pinal County, Arizona officials, for their enforcement of Arizona鈥檚 civil asset forfeiture laws.
The defendants filed three motions to dismiss, but a federal court ruled on August 18, 2017, that the claims at the heart of the case can move forward. The judge found that the lawsuit establishes a plausible claim that the state鈥檚 asset forfeiture laws violate due process rights 鈥渂ecause Defendants have a financial incentive to zealously enforce the forfeiture laws.鈥
Georgia
Aug 2017
Women's Rights
Alisha Coleman v. Bobby Dodd Institute
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Georgia and co-counsel Buckley Beal LLP filed a brief in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that their client, Alisha Coleman, was subjected to unlawful workplace discrimination when she was fired for experiencing a heavy period, a symptom of premenopause.
Explore case
Georgia
Aug 2017
Women's Rights
Alisha Coleman v. Bobby Dodd Institute
The 红杏视频, the 红杏视频 of Georgia and co-counsel Buckley Beal LLP filed a brief in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that their client, Alisha Coleman, was subjected to unlawful workplace discrimination when she was fired for experiencing a heavy period, a symptom of premenopause.
Court Case
Aug 2017
National Security
Salim v. Mitchell 鈥 Lawsuit Against Psychologists Behind CIA Torture Program
The 红杏视频 filed a lawsuit against James Elmer Mitchell and John 鈥淏ruce鈥 Jessen, two psychologists contracted by the CIA to design, implement, and oversee the agency鈥檚 post-9/11 torture program. The suit, filed in October 2015 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, was on behalf of three of the program鈥檚 victims. All three were kidnapped by the CIA, and tortured and experimented upon according to Mitchell and Jessen鈥檚 protocols. One of the men died as a result of his torture. The other two continue to suffer the effects of the physical and psychological torture inflicted on them. In August 2017, after the judge rejected attempts to dismiss the case and a trial was imminent, the psychologists agreed to a settlement 鈥 a first for a case involving CIA torture.
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2017
National Security
Salim v. Mitchell 鈥 Lawsuit Against Psychologists Behind CIA Torture Program
The 红杏视频 filed a lawsuit against James Elmer Mitchell and John 鈥淏ruce鈥 Jessen, two psychologists contracted by the CIA to design, implement, and oversee the agency鈥檚 post-9/11 torture program. The suit, filed in October 2015 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, was on behalf of three of the program鈥檚 victims. All three were kidnapped by the CIA, and tortured and experimented upon according to Mitchell and Jessen鈥檚 protocols. One of the men died as a result of his torture. The other two continue to suffer the effects of the physical and psychological torture inflicted on them. In August 2017, after the judge rejected attempts to dismiss the case and a trial was imminent, the psychologists agreed to a settlement 鈥 a first for a case involving CIA torture.
Court Case
Aug 2017
Immigrants' Rights
P.K. v. Tillerson
The 红杏视频 filed a federal lawsuit challenging the State Department鈥檚 refusal to process visa applications for winners of the U.S. Diversity Visa Program lottery who hail from the six countries covered by President Trump鈥檚 Muslim ban. The ban currently blocks individuals from Iran, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia, who do not have bona fide connections or fall within another exception, from entering the United States until September 24, 2017. It does not, however, allow the government to refuse to issue visas to them, in violation of federal statutes and regulations.
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2017
Immigrants' Rights
P.K. v. Tillerson
The 红杏视频 filed a federal lawsuit challenging the State Department鈥檚 refusal to process visa applications for winners of the U.S. Diversity Visa Program lottery who hail from the six countries covered by President Trump鈥檚 Muslim ban. The ban currently blocks individuals from Iran, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Yemen, and Somalia, who do not have bona fide connections or fall within another exception, from entering the United States until September 24, 2017. It does not, however, allow the government to refuse to issue visas to them, in violation of federal statutes and regulations.
Nebraska
Aug 2017
Prisoners' Rights
Sabata v. Nebraska Department of Corrections et al
Nebraska state prisons are in a state of chaos that is endangering the health, safety, and lives of prisoners and staff on a daily basis. For over twenty years, Nebraska prisons have been overcrowded, under-resourced, and understaffed. Prisoners are consistently deprived of adequate health care, including medical, dental, and mental health care, and denied accommodations for their disabilities. Nebraska state prisoners, including juveniles, suffer in harsh isolation units for excessive terms, sometimes lasting for years. These harms must end.
Explore case
Nebraska
Aug 2017
Prisoners' Rights
Sabata v. Nebraska Department of Corrections et al
Nebraska state prisons are in a state of chaos that is endangering the health, safety, and lives of prisoners and staff on a daily basis. For over twenty years, Nebraska prisons have been overcrowded, under-resourced, and understaffed. Prisoners are consistently deprived of adequate health care, including medical, dental, and mental health care, and denied accommodations for their disabilities. Nebraska state prisoners, including juveniles, suffer in harsh isolation units for excessive terms, sometimes lasting for years. These harms must end.