Featured

Missouri
Feb 2026
A briefcase of a Census taker.

Voting Rights

Missouri v. U.S. Department of Commerce

A coalition of civil rights and immigrant-rights organizations has moved to intervene as defendants in a lawsuit that threatens to dismantle the Constitution’s long-standing requirement that the decennial census count all people living in the United States. Missouri asks the court to exclude undocumented immigrants and people living in the country on temporary visas from the census count used to determine congressional representation—an unprecedented move that would upend more than two centuries of constitutional practice.
Missouri V. U.s. Department Of Commerce. Explore Case.
Mississippi
Dec 2025
Mississippi

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.
White V. Mississippi State Board Of Elections. Explore Case.
Court Case
Dec 2025
FOIA Case Seeking the Trump Administration’s Legal Justification for Deadly Boat Strikes

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 ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵis seeking immediate release of the OLC legal opinion and related documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act.
Foia Case Seeking The Trump Administration’s Legal Justification For Deadly Boat Strikes. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2025
A collage image featuring an image of the Supreme Court and an image of a young girl waving an American flag.

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 ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵand 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.
Barbara V. Donald J. Trump. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Nov 2025
Alabama on a map of the United States of America

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.
Allen V. Milligan. Explore Case.
Washington, D.C.
Oct 2025
trump

Voting Rights

League of Women Voters Education Fund v. Trump

On March 25, 2025, in a sweeping and unprecedented Executive Order, President Trump attempted to usurp the power to regulate federal elections from Congress and the States. Among other things, the Executive Order directs the Election Assistance Commission—an agency that Congress specifically established to be bipartisan and independent—to require voters to show a passport or other citizenship documentation in order to register to vote in federal elections. If implemented, the Executive Order would threaten the ability of millions of eligible Americans to register and vote and upend the administration of federal elections. On behalf of leading voter registration organizations and advocacy organizations, the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵand co-counsel filed a lawsuit to block the Executive Order as an unconstitutional power grab.
League Of Women Voters Education Fund V. Trump. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2025
Mississippi

Voting Rights

State Board of Election Commissioners v. Mississippi State Conference of the NAACP

Mississippi has a growing Black population, which is already the largest Black population percentage of any state in the country. Yet. Black Mississippians continue to be significantly under-represented in the state legislature, as Mississippi’s latest districting maps fail to reflect the reality of the state’s changing demographics. During the 2022 redistricting process, the Mississippi legislature refused to create any new districts where Black voters have a chance to elect their preferred representative. The current district lines therefore dilute the voting power of Black Mississippians and continue to deprive them of political representation that is responsive to their needs and concerns, including severe disparities in education and healthcare.
State Board Of Election Commissioners V. Mississippi State Conference Of The Naacp. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Oct 2025
Louisiana

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.
Louisiana V. Callais (callais V. Landry). Explore Case.
Missouri
Sep 2025
A close up of an "I Voted" sticker.

Voting Rights

Wise v. Missouri

In unprecedented fashion, the State of Missouri has redrawn the district lines used for electing members of Congress for a second time this decade. These new district lines are gerrymandered and will harm political representation for all Missourians, particularly Black residents in Kansas City, who have been divided along racial lines.
Wise V. Missouri. Explore Case.

All Cases

1,680 Court Cases

Usachenok v. State of New Jersey
New Jersey Supreme Court
Nov 2023

Women's Rights

Free Speech

Usachenok v. State of New Jersey

The New Jersey Department of Treasury maintains a policy that requires employers investigating workplace discrimination to “request” confidentiality from all witnesses with respect to any information related to the investigation. This case involves whether a confidentiality policy of this kind violates the free speech rights under the New Jersey Constitution of state employees who are witnesses, and whether those rights are broader than the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment free speech right. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and Women’s Rights Project, along with the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵof New Jersey, filed an amicus brief in the New Jersey Supreme Court, urging that court to revive a government employee’s speech claim challenging the confidentiality policy and to interpret the New Jersey Constitution’s speech protection more broadly than federal constitutional law. In April 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in our favor and reversed the judgment of the Appellate Division.
Explore case
Usachenok V. State Of New Jersey. Explore Case.
New Jersey Supreme Court
Nov 2023
Usachenok v. State of New Jersey

Women's Rights

Free Speech

Usachenok v. State of New Jersey

The New Jersey Department of Treasury maintains a policy that requires employers investigating workplace discrimination to “request” confidentiality from all witnesses with respect to any information related to the investigation. This case involves whether a confidentiality policy of this kind violates the free speech rights under the New Jersey Constitution of state employees who are witnesses, and whether those rights are broader than the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment free speech right. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and Women’s Rights Project, along with the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵof New Jersey, filed an amicus brief in the New Jersey Supreme Court, urging that court to revive a government employee’s speech claim challenging the confidentiality policy and to interpret the New Jersey Constitution’s speech protection more broadly than federal constitutional law. In April 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in our favor and reversed the judgment of the Appellate Division.
Usachenok V. State Of New Jersey. Explore Case.
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues
Florida
Nov 2023

Free Speech

+2 ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵ

Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues

The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida’s order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students’ constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵand its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
Explore case
Students For Justice In Palestine At The University Of Florida V. Raymond Rodrigues. Explore Case.
Florida
Nov 2023
Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues

Free Speech

+2 ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵ

Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida v. Raymond Rodrigues

The University of Florida chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine filed a lawsuit on November 16, 2023, challenging the Chancellor of the State University System of Florida’s order to state universities to deactivate the student group. This order threatens the students’ constitutionally-protected right to free speech and association in violation of the First Amendment. The ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵand its partners are seeking a preliminary injunction that would bar the Chancellor and the University of Florida from deactivating the UF SJP.
Students For Justice In Palestine At The University Of Florida V. Raymond Rodrigues. Explore Case.
Barrani v. Salt Lake City
Utah Supreme Court
Nov 2023

Civil Liberties

Human Rights

Barrani v. Salt Lake City

Hundreds if not thousands of Salt Lake City, Utah, residents have nowhere safe to stay and must live and sleep in public. This case—brought by a small group of residents and businesses—involves the question whether this citywide homelessness crisis constitutes a nuisance under Utah state law. It also presents the question whether Salt Lake City can be ordered to clear encampments, forcibly relocate people who are unhoused, and enforce vague and overbroad laws criminalizing homelessness where doing so will likely, if not certainly, violate unhoused people’s state and federal constitutional rights. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and Trone Center for Justice and Equality, along with the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵof Utah and the Salt Lake Legal Defenders Association, represent amici curiae in the trial court who oppose the plaintiffs’ nuisance claims and their request for relief.
Explore case
Barrani V. Salt Lake City. Explore Case.
Utah Supreme Court
Nov 2023
Barrani v. Salt Lake City

Civil Liberties

Human Rights

Barrani v. Salt Lake City

Hundreds if not thousands of Salt Lake City, Utah, residents have nowhere safe to stay and must live and sleep in public. This case—brought by a small group of residents and businesses—involves the question whether this citywide homelessness crisis constitutes a nuisance under Utah state law. It also presents the question whether Salt Lake City can be ordered to clear encampments, forcibly relocate people who are unhoused, and enforce vague and overbroad laws criminalizing homelessness where doing so will likely, if not certainly, violate unhoused people’s state and federal constitutional rights. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative and Trone Center for Justice and Equality, along with the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵof Utah and the Salt Lake Legal Defenders Association, represent amici curiae in the trial court who oppose the plaintiffs’ nuisance claims and their request for relief.
Barrani V. Salt Lake City. Explore Case.
Black girl runner crossing the red victory ribbon
Texas
Nov 2023

Women's Rights

Free Speech

Spring Branch ISD Advocacy – Dress Code Discrimination

On March 1, 2023, WRP and the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵof Texas sent an advocacy letter to Spring Branch Independent School District (“District”) on behalf of G.H., a Spring Woods High School student athlete. The ACLU’s investigation had revealed that the District maintained a discriminatory, sex-specific dress code and gender-based inequities in the school’s athletics program, and that the student was mistreated after objecting to these policies and practices. The advocacy letter raised concerns that the District’s actions reinforced invidious sex stereotypes, treated girl athletes as lesser than boy athletes, and potentially violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The District’s policies and actions harm all students, regardless of gender, but have particularly egregious consequences for Black girls and other girls of color.
Explore case
Spring Branch Isd Advocacy – Dress Code Discrimination. Explore Case.
Texas
Nov 2023
Black girl runner crossing the red victory ribbon

Women's Rights

Free Speech

Spring Branch ISD Advocacy – Dress Code Discrimination

On March 1, 2023, WRP and the ĚŇ×ÓĘÓƵof Texas sent an advocacy letter to Spring Branch Independent School District (“District”) on behalf of G.H., a Spring Woods High School student athlete. The ACLU’s investigation had revealed that the District maintained a discriminatory, sex-specific dress code and gender-based inequities in the school’s athletics program, and that the student was mistreated after objecting to these policies and practices. The advocacy letter raised concerns that the District’s actions reinforced invidious sex stereotypes, treated girl athletes as lesser than boy athletes, and potentially violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The District’s policies and actions harm all students, regardless of gender, but have particularly egregious consequences for Black girls and other girls of color.
Spring Branch Isd Advocacy – Dress Code Discrimination. 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’s 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’s 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.
7273
74
7576...