Supreme Court Term 2025-2026
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Closed
Updated August 6, 2026
Ongoing
Updated July 29, 2026
Closed (Judgment)
Updated June 29, 2026
Closed (Judgment)
Updated June 18, 2026
Featured
Florida
Aug 2026
National Security
+2 Issues
CAIR-Foundation, Inc and CAIR Florida, Inc. v. DeSantis et al.
The ACLU, the ACLU 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.
Massachusetts
Aug 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.
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 ACLU 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 American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), ACLU 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.
U.S. Supreme Court
Feb 2026
Immigrants' Rights
Barbara v. Donald J. Trump
President Trump is attempting to undermine the promise of birthright citizenship to children born on U.S. soil. But the ACLU and partners are fighting to protect the rights of citizens that are plainly stated in the Constitution, federal statute, and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court for more than a century. We’re arguing against the Trump administration in the Supreme Court and are confident we will win.
All Cases
1,737 Court Cases
Ohio
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Moe v. Yost
Two transgender adolescents and their families are challenging Ohio’s House Bill 68, a law passed in January 2024 that prohibits gender-affirming medical care that is widely accepted to treat gender dysphoria, helping alleviate the distress of gender dysphoria and significantly improving patients’ mental health and well-being. Such treatment is supported by leading medical experts and all major U.S. medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Explore case
Ohio
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Moe v. Yost
Two transgender adolescents and their families are challenging Ohio’s House Bill 68, a law passed in January 2024 that prohibits gender-affirming medical care that is widely accepted to treat gender dysphoria, helping alleviate the distress of gender dysphoria and significantly improving patients’ mental health and well-being. Such treatment is supported by leading medical experts and all major U.S. medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Kansas
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Loe v. Kansas
In May 2025, two transgender adolescents and their parents filed a challenge in Kansas state court against SB 63, a state law prohibiting access to gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender people under 18. Access to gender-affirming medical care, such as hormone therapies and pubertal suppressants, for transgender adolescents is supported by the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Explore case
Kansas
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Loe v. Kansas
In May 2025, two transgender adolescents and their parents filed a challenge in Kansas state court against SB 63, a state law prohibiting access to gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender people under 18. Access to gender-affirming medical care, such as hormone therapies and pubertal suppressants, for transgender adolescents is supported by the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Virginia
Jul 2026
Voting Rights
United States v. Koski
The Department of Justice (DOJ) sued the State of Virginia, seeking private, confidential voter data. DOJ’s efforts appear to be part of an effort to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.
Explore case
Virginia
Jul 2026
Voting Rights
United States v. Koski
The Department of Justice (DOJ) sued the State of Virginia, seeking private, confidential voter data. DOJ’s efforts appear to be part of an effort to build a national voter database without congressional authorization and to improperly question the validity of state voter rolls.
West Virginia
Jul 2026
Voting Rights
United States v. Warner
The United States has sued West Virginia, seeking access to the State's complete voter registration file, including fields that are not publicly available. The West Virginia Citizen Action Group (CAG), a non profit organization representing voters across the State, has moved to intervene. Represented by the ACLU, ACLU of West Virginia, the Campaign Legal Center, and the Brennan Center for Justice, CAG argues that its members' personal data and ability to participate in elections are directly at risk.
Explore case
West Virginia
Jul 2026
Voting Rights
United States v. Warner
The United States has sued West Virginia, seeking access to the State's complete voter registration file, including fields that are not publicly available. The West Virginia Citizen Action Group (CAG), a non profit organization representing voters across the State, has moved to intervene. Represented by the ACLU, ACLU of West Virginia, the Campaign Legal Center, and the Brennan Center for Justice, CAG argues that its members' personal data and ability to participate in elections are directly at risk.
Virginia
Jul 2026
National Security
Trabelsi v. Crawford, et al. – Lawsuit Challenging Unlawful Detention and Inhumane Treatment of Acquitted Man
Our client, Nizar Trabelsi, was being held in the United States against his will. The federal government brought him here from Belgium in 2013 and charged him with terrorism-related crimes. At trial, the government’s case failed: a federal jury found Mr. Trabelsi not guilty. But instead of allowing Mr. Trabelsi to return to Belgium after his acquittal, the United States placed him in highly restrictive immigration detention and began an ongoing effort to force him to Tunisia, where he was born and where he would very likely be tortured.
Mr. Trabelsi’s detention violated the Constitution, immigration law, and the extradition treaty between the United States and Belgium. Through this lawsuit, he sought to return to Belgium, and he demanded an immediate improvement of his detention conditions. In 2025, at long last, the United States removed him from detention and returned him to Belgium.
Explore case
Virginia
Jul 2026
National Security
Trabelsi v. Crawford, et al. – Lawsuit Challenging Unlawful Detention and Inhumane Treatment of Acquitted Man
Our client, Nizar Trabelsi, was being held in the United States against his will. The federal government brought him here from Belgium in 2013 and charged him with terrorism-related crimes. At trial, the government’s case failed: a federal jury found Mr. Trabelsi not guilty. But instead of allowing Mr. Trabelsi to return to Belgium after his acquittal, the United States placed him in highly restrictive immigration detention and began an ongoing effort to force him to Tunisia, where he was born and where he would very likely be tortured.
Mr. Trabelsi’s detention violated the Constitution, immigration law, and the extradition treaty between the United States and Belgium. Through this lawsuit, he sought to return to Belgium, and he demanded an immediate improvement of his detention conditions. In 2025, at long last, the United States removed him from detention and returned him to Belgium.