Supreme Court Term 2025-2026

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.

Florida passed a new law conditioning a citizen’s ability to register to vote, to update their voter registration, and to remain on the voter registration rolls on the production of specified forms of documentary proof of citizenship (“DPOC”). Thousands of Florida citizens do not have ready access to these documents, especially some of the state’s most vulnerable voters.

A group of midwives and doctors filed a lawsuit in state court challenging actions by the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH), which imposed a de facto ban on freestanding birth centers throughout Alabama. Birth centers provide midwifery care to low-risk pregnant patients, a model of care that is proven to be safe and beneficial to patients. Despite that, ADPH took actions that forced one center to abruptly shut down in 2023 despite a perfect safety record, and then passed onerous regulations that would require birth centers to meet hospital-like standards, preventing birth centers from operating in the state. After hearing oral argument in late September 2023, the Circuit Court of Montgomery County granted our request for a Preliminary Injunction on September 30, 2023, preventing ADPH from refusing to timely license freestanding birth centers that comply with nationally-recognized safety standards for birth centers while litigation continues. In May 2025, the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court issued judgment in Plaintiffs’ favor blocking the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) from regulating freestanding birth centers like hospitals and imposing onerous licensing rules that would have made it effectively impossible for these centers to provide evidence-based midwifery care in the state. The ruling ensured that plaintiffs Oasis Family Birthing Center in Birmingham and Alabama Birth Center in Huntsville, which had been safely operating for the past year, could continue providing midwifery care to pregnant Alabamians. Defendants appealed this ruling in July 2025, and in January 2026, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed the lower court's decision, ruling that ADPH does have authority to require freestanding birth centers to be licensed and regulated as "hospitals." Plaintiffs are seeking further court review of the decision, and Alabama birth centers will continue operating and providing essential care to their patients while litigation is ongoing.

This case asks whether Michigan should adopt an approach to state constitutional interpretation that prioritizes Michigan sources and does not automatically require reference to parallel federal provisions or interpretations. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the constitutional rights of Michiganders because an interpretation of the Michigan Constitution untethered from federal precedent provides an independent, and potentially more expansive, layer of security for individual rights.