Supreme Court Term 2025-2026
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Ongoing
Updated August 31, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 31, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 28, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 17, 2026
Featured
Massachusetts
Sep 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.
Florida
Sep 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.
Court Case
Sep 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.
Oregon Supreme Court
Aug 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Prisoners' Rights
Zyst v. Miller
Following the Oregon Department of Corrections’ unconstitutional treatment of a transgender prisoner, a habeas court ordered her removal from segregated housing, an individualized gender-affirming care assessment, a psychiatric evaluation, and identification of an appropriate cellmate. However, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the psychiatric-evaluation and cellmate orders, finding them “too attenuated” to qualify as habeas relief. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Oregon, joined an amicus brief by the law firm Sugerman Dahab arguing that habeas courts have broad discretion to remedy violations and resulting harms. The brief explains that the Court of Appeals’ “close connection” test unduly constricts habeas relief, and which should be construed to encompass not only the need to halt ongoing constitutional violations, but also the need to mitigate various harms that may arise from those violations.
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.
All Cases
1,746 Court Cases
Court Case
Jun 2021
Reproductive Freedom
Bryant et al. v. Woodall et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union, along with Planned Parenthood and the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a federal lawsuit that seeks to overturn North Carolina’s unconstitutional law that prevents doctors from providing abortion care to a woman after the twentieth week of pregnancy.
Explore case
Court Case
Jun 2021
Reproductive Freedom
Bryant et al. v. Woodall et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union, along with Planned Parenthood and the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a federal lawsuit that seeks to overturn North Carolina’s unconstitutional law that prevents doctors from providing abortion care to a woman after the twentieth week of pregnancy.
Arkansas
May 2021
Reproductive Freedom
Little Rock Family Planning Services, et al., v. Larry Jegley, et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Arkansas, and Planned Parenthood Federation filed a lawsuit challenging Arkansas’s new total ban on abortion.
Explore case
Arkansas
May 2021
Reproductive Freedom
Little Rock Family Planning Services, et al., v. Larry Jegley, et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Arkansas, and Planned Parenthood Federation filed a lawsuit challenging Arkansas’s new total ban on abortion.
Court Case
May 2021
National Security
Free Speech
Sadat v. Trump - Challenge to Trump's International Criminal Court’s Sanctions Regime
On January 15, 2021, the ACLU and Covington & Burling LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of three law faculty and an ACLU human rights attorney challenging former President Trump’s executive order authorizing sanctions against people who assist the International Criminal Court in investigating or prosecuting war crimes and other gross human rights violations.
Explore case
Court Case
May 2021
National Security
Free Speech
Sadat v. Trump - Challenge to Trump's International Criminal Court’s Sanctions Regime
On January 15, 2021, the ACLU and Covington & Burling LLP filed a lawsuit on behalf of three law faculty and an ACLU human rights attorney challenging former President Trump’s executive order authorizing sanctions against people who assist the International Criminal Court in investigating or prosecuting war crimes and other gross human rights violations.
Court Case
May 2021
National Security
Free Speech
Chebli v. Kable: Lawsuit Challenging Placement on No Fly List
In April 2021, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of the District of Columbia, and the ACLU 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 ACLU 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 “I’m relieved to be off the No Fly List, but still reeling from the government’s 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.”
Explore case
Court Case
May 2021
National Security
Free Speech
Chebli v. Kable: Lawsuit Challenging Placement on No Fly List
In April 2021, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of the District of Columbia, and the ACLU 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 ACLU 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 “I’m relieved to be off the No Fly List, but still reeling from the government’s 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.”
North Carolina
May 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Carcaño, et al. v. Cooper, et al
Filed by the ACLU and the ACLU 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 (“LGBT”) 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
Carcaño, et al. v. Cooper, et al
Filed by the ACLU and the ACLU 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 (“LGBT”) 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.