Supreme Court Term 2025-2026
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Closed (Judgment)
Updated June 29, 2026
Ongoing
Updated June 26, 2026
Ongoing
Updated June 25, 2026
Closed (Judgment)
Updated June 18, 2026
Featured
Florida
Jul 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.
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.
Massachusetts
Jun 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
May 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.
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.
Mississippi
Dec 2025
Voting Rights
White v. Mississippi State Board of Elections
District lines used to elect Mississippi’s Supreme Court have gone unchanged for more than 35 years. We’re suing because the current lines crack the Mississippi Delta and dilute the voting strength of Black Mississippians in state Supreme Court elections, in violation of the Voting Rights Act.
All Cases
1,720 Court Cases
Washington, D.C.
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Withrow v. United States et al.
A civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard filed a class action lawsuit in federal court challenging a Trump-Vance administration policy prohibiting transgender and intersex federal employees from using restrooms aligned with their gender.
Explore case
Washington, D.C.
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Withrow v. United States et al.
A civilian employee of the Illinois National Guard filed a class action lawsuit in federal court challenging a Trump-Vance administration policy prohibiting transgender and intersex federal employees from using restrooms aligned with their gender.
North Carolina
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Zayre-Brown v. North Carolina Department of Adult Corrections
The North Carolina Department of Public Safety has continually denied Kanautica Zayre-Brown, an incarcerated transgender woman in their custody, access to gender-affirming surgery.
Explore case
North Carolina
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Zayre-Brown v. North Carolina Department of Adult Corrections
The North Carolina Department of Public Safety has continually denied Kanautica Zayre-Brown, an incarcerated transgender woman in their custody, access to gender-affirming surgery.
Idaho
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.
Explore case
Idaho
Jul 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.
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.
Arizona
Jul 2026
Immigrants' Rights
Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project v. Mayes
The American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Arizona filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project challenging Section 5, a previously deferred provision of Proposition 314 that would unconstitutionally usurp federal immigration enforcement power by making it a state crime for some immigrants to enter or remain in Arizona. Courts across the country have repeatedly reaffirmed that immigration enforcement is a power that belongs exclusively to the federal government — not the states.
Explore case
Arizona
Jul 2026
Immigrants' Rights
Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project v. Mayes
The American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Arizona filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project challenging Section 5, a previously deferred provision of Proposition 314 that would unconstitutionally usurp federal immigration enforcement power by making it a state crime for some immigrants to enter or remain in Arizona. Courts across the country have repeatedly reaffirmed that immigration enforcement is a power that belongs exclusively to the federal government — not the states.