Supreme Court Term 2025-2026
We’re breaking down the cases we've asked the court to consider this term.
Latest Case Updates
Updated September 10, 2026
Ongoing
Updated September 8, 2026
Closed
Updated August 31, 2026
Ongoing
Updated August 31, 2026
Featured
Florida
Oct 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.
Washington, D.C.
Oct 2026
Voting Rights
Common Cause v. U.S. Department of Justice
The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an unprecedented and unlawful effort to invade the privacy of millions of American voters and threaten their right to vote. It has demanded that every state and the District of Columbia turn over their entire voter database, including Social Security Numbers, political party affiliation, and voter participation history. And at least a dozen states have complied, submitting their voters’ information for federal review. But the Department of Justice has no authority to dictate when a voter registration should be cancelled, and we are suing to stop the federal government’s overreach and ensure that voters’ information remains secure and free from unlawful interference.
Court Case
Oct 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.
Ohio
Sep 2026
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region et al., v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the law firm WilmerHale, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm, on behalf of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio, Preterm-Cleveland, Women’s Med Group Professional Corporation, Dr. Sharon Liner, and Julia Quinn, MSN, BSN, amended a complaint in an existing lawsuit against a ban on telehealth medication abortion services to bring new claims under the Ohio Reproductive Freedom Amendment, including additional challenges to other laws in Ohio that restrict access to medication abortion in the state.
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.
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.
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.
All Cases
1,756 Court Cases
Georgia
Aug 2017
Women's Rights
Alisha Coleman v. Bobby Dodd Institute
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Georgia and co-counsel Buckley Beal LLP filed a brief in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that their client, Alisha Coleman, was subjected to unlawful workplace discrimination when she was fired for experiencing a heavy period, a symptom of premenopause.
Explore case
Georgia
Aug 2017
Women's Rights
Alisha Coleman v. Bobby Dodd Institute
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Georgia and co-counsel Buckley Beal LLP filed a brief in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that their client, Alisha Coleman, was subjected to unlawful workplace discrimination when she was fired for experiencing a heavy period, a symptom of premenopause.
Nebraska
Aug 2017
Prisoners' Rights
Sabata v. Nebraska Department of Corrections et al
Nebraska state prisons are in a state of chaos that is endangering the health, safety, and lives of prisoners and staff on a daily basis. For over twenty years, Nebraska prisons have been overcrowded, under-resourced, and understaffed. Prisoners are consistently deprived of adequate health care, including medical, dental, and mental health care, and denied accommodations for their disabilities. Nebraska state prisoners, including juveniles, suffer in harsh isolation units for excessive terms, sometimes lasting for years. These harms must end.
Explore case
Nebraska
Aug 2017
Prisoners' Rights
Sabata v. Nebraska Department of Corrections et al
Nebraska state prisons are in a state of chaos that is endangering the health, safety, and lives of prisoners and staff on a daily basis. For over twenty years, Nebraska prisons have been overcrowded, under-resourced, and understaffed. Prisoners are consistently deprived of adequate health care, including medical, dental, and mental health care, and denied accommodations for their disabilities. Nebraska state prisoners, including juveniles, suffer in harsh isolation units for excessive terms, sometimes lasting for years. These harms must end.
Washington, D.C.
Aug 2017
Free Speech
ACLU et al. v. WMATA – First Amendment Challenge to D.C. Metro’s Advertising Restrictions
The ACLU and its affiliates in the District of Columbia and Virginia challenged the Washington area transit system’s advertising restrictions as violations of the First Amendment. The free speech lawsuit follows the rejection of ads from four groups that hail from across the political spectrum.
Explore case
Washington, D.C.
Aug 2017
Free Speech
ACLU et al. v. WMATA – First Amendment Challenge to D.C. Metro’s Advertising Restrictions
The ACLU and its affiliates in the District of Columbia and Virginia challenged the Washington area transit system’s advertising restrictions as violations of the First Amendment. The free speech lawsuit follows the rejection of ads from four groups that hail from across the political spectrum.
Louisiana
Aug 2017
Smart Justice
Ayo v. Dunn et al
For years, people arrested in East Baton Rouge Parish who appeared before Judge Trudy White have been jailed unless they pay a $525 fee to a private corporation called Rehabilitation Home Incarceration (“RHI”). This fee is paid by each person for their own pre-trial release. This fee is paid in addition to any bail amount required by the judge as a condition for that person’s release. This has been going on for at least three years in the parish.
Explore case
Louisiana
Aug 2017
Smart Justice
Ayo v. Dunn et al
For years, people arrested in East Baton Rouge Parish who appeared before Judge Trudy White have been jailed unless they pay a $525 fee to a private corporation called Rehabilitation Home Incarceration (“RHI”). This fee is paid by each person for their own pre-trial release. This fee is paid in addition to any bail amount required by the judge as a condition for that person’s release. This has been going on for at least three years in the parish.
Court Case
Aug 2017
National Security
Raza v. City of New York - Legal Challenge to NYPD Muslim Surveillance Program
The ACLU, the NYCLU, and the CLEAR project at CUNY Law School filed a lawsuit in June 2013 challenging the New York City Police Department’s discriminatory and unjustified surveillance of New York Muslims. We were later joined by the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP. The plaintiffs include three religious and community leaders, two mosques, and one charitable organization, all of whom were subject to the NYPD’s unconstitutional religious profiling program. In January 2016, we announced a proposed settlement in the case with important reforms that include a bar against NYPD investigations on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity, and the creation of a civilian representative position to oversee rules that safeguard against discriminatory and unjustified NYPD surveillance. That settlement was a joint one, with both the NYPD and the lawyers in Handschu v. Special Services Division, a long-standing class action that challenged the NYPD’s unlawful surveillance of political groups and activists. In October 2016, the federal district court judge presiding over the Handschu case held that he would approve the settlement if the parties agreed to three alterations, which would further strengthen protections. In March 2017, the courts in both Handschu and Raza approved the revised settlement.
Explore case
Court Case
Aug 2017
National Security
Raza v. City of New York - Legal Challenge to NYPD Muslim Surveillance Program
The ACLU, the NYCLU, and the CLEAR project at CUNY Law School filed a lawsuit in June 2013 challenging the New York City Police Department’s discriminatory and unjustified surveillance of New York Muslims. We were later joined by the law firm of Morrison & Foerster LLP. The plaintiffs include three religious and community leaders, two mosques, and one charitable organization, all of whom were subject to the NYPD’s unconstitutional religious profiling program. In January 2016, we announced a proposed settlement in the case with important reforms that include a bar against NYPD investigations on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity, and the creation of a civilian representative position to oversee rules that safeguard against discriminatory and unjustified NYPD surveillance. That settlement was a joint one, with both the NYPD and the lawyers in Handschu v. Special Services Division, a long-standing class action that challenged the NYPD’s unlawful surveillance of political groups and activists. In October 2016, the federal district court judge presiding over the Handschu case held that he would approve the settlement if the parties agreed to three alterations, which would further strengthen protections. In March 2017, the courts in both Handschu and Raza approved the revised settlement.