South Carolina

All Cases

18 South Carolina Cases

South Carolina
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2024

Voting Rights

Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (Congressional Map Challenge)

South Carolina unlawfully assigned voters to congressional districts based on their race and intentionally discriminated against Black voters in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
Explore case
Alexander V. South Carolina State Conference Of The Naacp (congressional Map Challenge). Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2024
South Carolina

Voting Rights

Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP (Congressional Map Challenge)

South Carolina unlawfully assigned voters to congressional districts based on their race and intentionally discriminated against Black voters in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
Alexander V. South Carolina State Conference Of The Naacp (congressional Map Challenge). Explore Case.
Brandy, Eden, Jenny, and Olivia
South Carolina
Nov 2023

LGBTQ Rights

Rogers v. Health and Human Services

Eden Rogers and Brandy Welch were turned away by a government-funded foster care agency for failing to meet the agency鈥檚 religious criteria which exclude prospective foster parents who are not evangelical Protestant Christian or who are same-sex couples of any faith.
Explore case
Rogers V. Health And Human Services. Explore Case.
South Carolina
Nov 2023
Brandy, Eden, Jenny, and Olivia

LGBTQ Rights

Rogers v. Health and Human Services

Eden Rogers and Brandy Welch were turned away by a government-funded foster care agency for failing to meet the agency鈥檚 religious criteria which exclude prospective foster parents who are not evangelical Protestant Christian or who are same-sex couples of any faith.
Rogers V. Health And Human Services. Explore Case.
Cayeshia Johnson
South Carolina
Mar 2023

Smart Justice

Racial Justice

Brown v. Lexington County, et al

This case is part of a nationwide fight against criminalization of poverty and, specifically, debtors' prisons. On June 1, 2017, the ACLU's Racial Justice Program, the 桃子视频of South Carolina, and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC filed a federal lawsuit challenging the illegal arrest and incarceration of indigent people in Lexington County, South Carolina, for failure to pay fines and fees, without determining willfulness or providing assistance to counsel. Those targeted by this long-standing practice could avoid jail only if they paid the entire amount of outstanding court fines and fees up front and in full. Indigent people who were unable to pay were incarcerated for weeks to months without ever seeing a judge, having a court hearing, or receiving help from a lawyer. The result was one of the most draconian debtors鈥 prisons uncovered by the 桃子视频since 2010.
Explore case
Brown V. Lexington County, Et Al. Explore Case.
South Carolina
Mar 2023
Cayeshia Johnson

Smart Justice

Racial Justice

Brown v. Lexington County, et al

This case is part of a nationwide fight against criminalization of poverty and, specifically, debtors' prisons. On June 1, 2017, the ACLU's Racial Justice Program, the 桃子视频of South Carolina, and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC filed a federal lawsuit challenging the illegal arrest and incarceration of indigent people in Lexington County, South Carolina, for failure to pay fines and fees, without determining willfulness or providing assistance to counsel. Those targeted by this long-standing practice could avoid jail only if they paid the entire amount of outstanding court fines and fees up front and in full. Indigent people who were unable to pay were incarcerated for weeks to months without ever seeing a judge, having a court hearing, or receiving help from a lawyer. The result was one of the most draconian debtors鈥 prisons uncovered by the 桃子视频since 2010.
Brown V. Lexington County, Et Al. Explore Case.
Niya in front of school
South Carolina
Feb 2023

Juvenile Justice

+2 桃子视频

CYAP v. Wilson

The 桃子视频 filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina鈥檚 鈥渄isturbing schools鈥 and 鈥渄isorderly conduct鈥 laws. The laws allowed students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined 鈥渙bnoxious鈥 actions on school grounds and encouraged discriminatory enforcement against Black students and students with disabilities. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling that enforcing these laws against students was unconstitutional, affirming that subjecting students to criminal penalties under such vague rules interferes with their education and their future, and produces stark racial disparities. This decision should be instructive to the many school districts across the country where students continue to be charged with 鈥榙isorderly conduct鈥 and similar vague crimes.
Explore case
Cyap V. Wilson. Explore Case.
South Carolina
Feb 2023
Niya in front of school

Juvenile Justice

+2 桃子视频

CYAP v. Wilson

The 桃子视频 filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolina鈥檚 鈥渄isturbing schools鈥 and 鈥渄isorderly conduct鈥 laws. The laws allowed students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined 鈥渙bnoxious鈥 actions on school grounds and encouraged discriminatory enforcement against Black students and students with disabilities. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling that enforcing these laws against students was unconstitutional, affirming that subjecting students to criminal penalties under such vague rules interferes with their education and their future, and produces stark racial disparities. This decision should be instructive to the many school districts across the country where students continue to be charged with 鈥榙isorderly conduct鈥 and similar vague crimes.
Cyap V. Wilson. Explore Case.
1
2
34