Massachusetts
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.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Visit ACLU of Massachusetts
Featured
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
24 Massachusetts Cases
Massachusetts
Jul 2017
Voting Rights
Chelsea Collaborative v. Galvin
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachussetts, and others filed a lawsuit in Massachussetts challenging the state’s requirement that eligible voters register 20 days before an election. The arbitrary deadline interferes with the fundamental right to vote and unnecessarily disenfranchises voters.
Explore case
Massachusetts
Jul 2017
Voting Rights
Chelsea Collaborative v. Galvin
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachussetts, and others filed a lawsuit in Massachussetts challenging the state’s requirement that eligible voters register 20 days before an election. The arbitrary deadline interferes with the fundamental right to vote and unnecessarily disenfranchises voters.
Massachusetts
Jan 2017
Smart Justice
Criminal Law Reform
Bridgeman et. al v. District Attorney for Suffolk County et. al
Update: On January 18, 2017, the Massachusetts Supreme Court directed district attorneys to dismiss thousands of drug offense cases that were tainted by the misconduct of chemist Annie Dookhan. Prosecutors must produce a list of all drug convictions they plan to dismiss, and also produce a list of cases that they wish to re-prosecute, both within 90 days. They will be permitted to re-prosecute cases only if they certify they can do so on the basis of untainted evidence. The people hurt by Annie Dookhan’s actions deserve justice from the prosecutors who have the power to right thousands of grave wrongs by dismissing these cases.
Explore case
Massachusetts
Jan 2017
Smart Justice
Criminal Law Reform
Bridgeman et. al v. District Attorney for Suffolk County et. al
Update: On January 18, 2017, the Massachusetts Supreme Court directed district attorneys to dismiss thousands of drug offense cases that were tainted by the misconduct of chemist Annie Dookhan. Prosecutors must produce a list of all drug convictions they plan to dismiss, and also produce a list of cases that they wish to re-prosecute, both within 90 days. They will be permitted to re-prosecute cases only if they certify they can do so on the basis of untainted evidence. The people hurt by Annie Dookhan’s actions deserve justice from the prosecutors who have the power to right thousands of grave wrongs by dismissing these cases.
Massachusetts
Dec 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Gordon v. Johnson and CASTAÑEDA v. Souza
In Gordon v. Johnson, the ACLU and its partners obtained a class action ruling making some 150 Massachusetts detainees a year eligible for individual bond hearings. Rather than being held in “mandatory” immigration detention, without a bond hearing, these noncitizens may now obtain their release if an immigration judge concludes that they do not pose a danger or flight risk. Since May 2014, the federal district court’s ruling has allowed more than 100 noncitizens to be released from mandatory detention and remain with their families while their immigration cases are resolved.
Explore case
Massachusetts
Dec 2015
Immigrants' Rights
Gordon v. Johnson and CASTAÑEDA v. Souza
In Gordon v. Johnson, the ACLU and its partners obtained a class action ruling making some 150 Massachusetts detainees a year eligible for individual bond hearings. Rather than being held in “mandatory” immigration detention, without a bond hearing, these noncitizens may now obtain their release if an immigration judge concludes that they do not pose a danger or flight risk. Since May 2014, the federal district court’s ruling has allowed more than 100 noncitizens to be released from mandatory detention and remain with their families while their immigration cases are resolved.
Massachusetts
Dec 2012
Religious Liberty
+2 Issues
ACLU of Massachusetts v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.
From April 2006 to October 2011, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) $2.5 million to $4 million annually to fund organizations that provide direct services to trafficking victims under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act. HHS does this knowing that USCCB prohibits, based on its religious beliefs, grantees from using any of the federal funds to provide or refer for contraceptive or abortion services.
Explore case
Massachusetts
Dec 2012
Religious Liberty
+2 Issues
ACLU of Massachusetts v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al.
From April 2006 to October 2011, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has awarded the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) $2.5 million to $4 million annually to fund organizations that provide direct services to trafficking victims under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act. HHS does this knowing that USCCB prohibits, based on its religious beliefs, grantees from using any of the federal funds to provide or refer for contraceptive or abortion services.