Press Releases

ACLU litigation is leading courts to rethink warrants seizing our digital devices, social media accounts and other data to reinforce our Fourth Amendment protections.

LeAnne Withrow of Springfield, Illinois is a lead military and family readiness specialist and civilian employee for the Illinois National Guard. Previously, she served as a staff sergeant for the National Guard and is the recipient of multiple commendations and awards, including the Illinois National Guard Abraham Lincoln Medal of Freedom.   Following a January 20, 2025 executive order signed by President Trump, officials with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the federal National Guard Bureau issued notices to all employees requiring use of designated restrooms strictly based upon their “biological sex,” as inaccurately defined in the executive order. Soon after, Withrow was told by supervisors within her chain of command that she could not use restrooms designated for women.   On May 5, Ms. Withrow filed a class action complaint to the Army National Guard Bureau Equal Opportunity Office (NGB-EO), and later to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), challenging the federal order, but both the NGB-EO and EEOC failed to resolve the matter.   In November 2025, Withrow filed a class action lawsuit alleging that the executive order and implementation actions violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits sex discrimination in employment, and that the order and implementation violate the federal Administrative Procedure Act. The complaint was filed on behalf of Ms. Withrow by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of D.C., the ACLU of Illinois, and Democracy Forward.   “No one should have to choose between their career in service and their own dignity,” said Withrow. “I bring respect and honor to the work I do to support military families, and I hope the court will restore dignity to transgender people like me who serve this country every day.”

This consolidated case arises from two warrantless searches of closed containers belonging to criminal defendants. It raises two key questions: (1) whether the New Mexico Supreme Court should adopt an approach to interpreting the New Mexico Constitution that does not require reference to federal law, and (2) whether the New Mexico Constitution’s prohibition on unreasonable searches provides greater protections against inventory searches by police than does the federal Fourth Amendment standard.