California
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the ACLU of Northern California, and the ACLU of Southern California filed amicus briefs in support of everyday people fighting for government transparency and accountability in two cases set for review by the U.S. Supreme Court this Term: O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Visit ACLU of Southern California
Visit ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties
Visit ACLU of Northern California
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2022
Privacy & Technology
+2 Issues
FBI v. Fazaga
In a case scheduled to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on November 8, 2021, three Muslim Americans are challenging the FBI’s secret spying on them and their communities based on their religion, in violation of the Constitution and federal law. In what will likely be a landmark case, the plaintiffs — Yassir Fazaga, Ali Uddin Malik, and Yasser Abdelrahim — insist that the FBI cannot escape accountability for violating their religious freedom by invoking “state secrets.” The plaintiffs are represented by the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the ACLU of Southern California, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council for American Islamic Relations, and the law firm of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2023
Free Speech
O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed
The ACLU, the ACLU of Northern California, and the ACLU of Southern California filed amicus briefs in support of everyday people fighting for government transparency and accountability in two cases set for review by the U.S. Supreme Court this Term: O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021
Immigrants' Rights
Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf
The American Civil Liberties Union, Southern Poverty Law Center, and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s new policy forcing asylum seekers to return to Mexico and remain there while their cases are considered.
California
Mar 2019
Racial Justice
MediaJustice, et al. v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, et al.
On March 21, 2019, the American Civil Liberties Union and MediaJustice, formerly known as "Center for Media Justice," filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking records about FBI targeting of Black activists. The lawsuit enforces the ACLU and MediaJustice’s right to information about a 2017 FBI Intelligence Assessment that asserts, without evidence, that a group of so-called “Black Identity Extremists” poses a threat of domestic terrorism. The Intelligence Assessment was widely disseminated to law enforcement agencies nationwide, raising public concern about government surveillance of Black people and Black-led organizations based on anti-Black stereotypes and First Amendment protected activities.
All Northern California Cases
- Select Affiliate
- Northern California
- Southern California
- San Diego & Imperial Counties
35 Northern California Cases
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Religious Liberty
Dignity Health v. Minton
Evan Minton was turned away from a Dignity Health hospital because he is transgender. He filed a lawsuit against a Dignity Health medical center for withholding medical care because of a patient's gender identity, amounting to sex discrimination in violation of California's Unruh Civil Rights Act.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2021
LGBTQ Rights
Religious Liberty
Dignity Health v. Minton
Evan Minton was turned away from a Dignity Health hospital because he is transgender. He filed a lawsuit against a Dignity Health medical center for withholding medical care because of a patient's gender identity, amounting to sex discrimination in violation of California's Unruh Civil Rights Act.
California
Apr 2021
National Security
Kashem, et al. v. Barr, et al. - ACLU Challenge to Government No Fly List
Explore case
California
Apr 2021
National Security
Kashem, et al. v. Barr, et al. - ACLU Challenge to Government No Fly List
California
Oct 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Cross v. SFPD
Our Constitution promises all people, regardless of their race, equal protection under the laws. Accordingly, courts have long recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits selective enforcement of criminal laws based on race. Yet law enforcement officers of the City of San Francisco have repeatedly violated that clause, singling out Black people for enforcement.
Explore case
California
Oct 2019
Criminal Law Reform
Cross v. SFPD
Our Constitution promises all people, regardless of their race, equal protection under the laws. Accordingly, courts have long recognized that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits selective enforcement of criminal laws based on race. Yet law enforcement officers of the City of San Francisco have repeatedly violated that clause, singling out Black people for enforcement.
California
Oct 2018
National Security
ACLU V. DOJ – FOIA Lawsuit Seeking the Government’s Policy on Notifying Americans When It Spies on Them
In February 2017, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the U.S. Department of Justice to find out more about the circumstances under which the government thinks it can spy on Americans without telling them. In June 2017, together with the ACLU of Northern California, we filed a lawsuit to enforce the request in the District Court for the Northern District of California.
Explore case
California
Oct 2018
National Security
ACLU V. DOJ – FOIA Lawsuit Seeking the Government’s Policy on Notifying Americans When It Spies on Them
In February 2017, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the U.S. Department of Justice to find out more about the circumstances under which the government thinks it can spy on Americans without telling them. In June 2017, together with the ACLU of Northern California, we filed a lawsuit to enforce the request in the District Court for the Northern District of California.
California
Jul 2018
Racial Justice
Sigma Beta XI v County of Riverside
RIVERSIDE, CA — In the settlement of a lawsuit against the unconstitutional Youth Accountability Team (YAT) program in Riverside County that treated thousands of youths — especially those of color — like hardened criminals for minor adolescent misbehaviors, the county has agreed to groundbreaking measures.
Explore case
California
Jul 2018
Racial Justice
Sigma Beta XI v County of Riverside
RIVERSIDE, CA — In the settlement of a lawsuit against the unconstitutional Youth Accountability Team (YAT) program in Riverside County that treated thousands of youths — especially those of color — like hardened criminals for minor adolescent misbehaviors, the county has agreed to groundbreaking measures.