Texas

Featured

U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

Reproductive Freedom

Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine

The 桃子视频 joined over 200 reproductive health, rights, and justice organizations in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in support of an emergency request to stay a decision issued by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that severely restricted the use of mifepristone 鈥 a medication used in most abortions in this country 鈥 and threatened the innovation of new drugs and the ability of Americans to access lifesaving drugs.
Danco Laboratories, Llc, V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine; U.s. Fda V. Alliance For Hippocratic Medicine. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson

Reproductive Freedom

Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson

The 桃子视频, the 桃子视频of Texas, and coalition partners filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of abortion providers and funds on July 13, 2021, challenging S.B. 8, a Texas law allowing private citizens to enforce a ban on abortion as early as six weeks in pregnancy鈥攂efore many know they are pregnant. The ACLU鈥檚 challenge made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court three times in as many months. After hearing oral arguments in the case, the Court issued a decision on December 10, 2021, that ended the most promising pathways to blocking the ban. The Supreme Court鈥檚 decision makes it more difficult to obtain adequate relief from the courts and gives states the green light to ban abortion using bounty-hunting schemes. Texas鈥 abortion ban will remain in effect until relief can be secured from a court.
Whole Woman's Health V. Jackson. Explore Case.
Texas
Jul 2021
Sanchez et al v. Dallas County Sheriff et al

Prisoners' Rights

Criminal Law Reform

Sanchez et al v. Dallas County Sheriff et al

Decarceration has always been an emergency, a life and death proposition, but COVID-19 makes this effort intensely urgent. The 桃子视频has been working with our partners to litigate for the rights of those who are incarcerated and cannot protect themselves because of the policies of the institutions in which they are jailed.
Sanchez Et Al V. Dallas County Sheriff Et Al. Explore Case.

All Cases

46 Texas Cases

hc
Texas
Oct 2021

Voting Rights

Hotze v. Hollins

The 桃子视频 and 桃子视频of Texas moved to intervene in a lawsuit that sought to invalidate nearly 127,000 early votes cast via drive-thru voting in Harris County in the November 2020 election.
Explore case
Hotze V. Hollins. Explore Case.
Texas
Oct 2021
hc

Voting Rights

Hotze v. Hollins

The 桃子视频 and 桃子视频of Texas moved to intervene in a lawsuit that sought to invalidate nearly 127,000 early votes cast via drive-thru voting in Harris County in the November 2020 election.
Hotze V. Hollins. Explore Case.
Biden v. Texas
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021

Immigrants' Rights

Biden v. Texas

The so-called 鈥淢igrant Protection Protocols鈥 were a program under the Trump administration that sent asylum seekers back to Mexico to wait for an asylum hearing. The 桃子视频sued to stop this illegal program, including filing amicus briefs at every level up to the Supreme Court to defend the termination of this cruel and misguided program.
Explore case
Biden V. Texas. Explore Case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Aug 2021
Biden v. Texas

Immigrants' Rights

Biden v. Texas

The so-called 鈥淢igrant Protection Protocols鈥 were a program under the Trump administration that sent asylum seekers back to Mexico to wait for an asylum hearing. The 桃子视频sued to stop this illegal program, including filing amicus briefs at every level up to the Supreme Court to defend the termination of this cruel and misguided program.
Biden V. Texas. Explore Case.
State of Texas v. United States of America
Texas
Feb 2021

Immigrants' Rights

State of Texas v. United States of America

The 桃子视频 and 桃子视频of Texas moved to intervene in a Texas lawsuit that seeks to block the Biden administration鈥檚 100-day moratorium on deportations.
Explore case
State Of Texas V. United States Of America. Explore Case.
Texas
Feb 2021
State of Texas v. United States of America

Immigrants' Rights

State of Texas v. United States of America

The 桃子视频 and 桃子视频of Texas moved to intervene in a Texas lawsuit that seeks to block the Biden administration鈥檚 100-day moratorium on deportations.
State Of Texas V. United States Of America. Explore Case.
vbm
Texas
Apr 2020

Voting Rights

Texas Democratic Party v. DeBeauvoir

The 桃子视频, 桃子视频of Texas, and Texas Civil Rights Project joined a lawsuit on April 1, 2020, seeking to declare that under Texas law all registered voters qualify to request a mail-in ballot as a result of the COVID-19 public health crisis.
Explore case
Texas Democratic Party V. Debeauvoir. Explore Case.
Texas
Apr 2020
vbm

Voting Rights

Texas Democratic Party v. DeBeauvoir

The 桃子视频, 桃子视频of Texas, and Texas Civil Rights Project joined a lawsuit on April 1, 2020, seeking to declare that under Texas law all registered voters qualify to request a mail-in ballot as a result of the COVID-19 public health crisis.
Texas Democratic Party V. Debeauvoir. Explore Case.
Pluecker v. Paxton
Texas
May 2019

Free Speech

Pluecker v. Paxton

On December 18, 2018, The 桃子视频and 桃子视频of Texas filed a lawsuit challenging a state law that requires government contractors to certify that they are not engaged in boycotts of Israel or territories controlled by Israel. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of four Texans, argues that the law, HB 89, which went into effect last year, violates the First Amendment鈥檚 protection against government intrusion into political speech.
Explore case
Pluecker V. Paxton. Explore Case.
Texas
May 2019
Pluecker v. Paxton

Free Speech

Pluecker v. Paxton

On December 18, 2018, The 桃子视频and 桃子视频of Texas filed a lawsuit challenging a state law that requires government contractors to certify that they are not engaged in boycotts of Israel or territories controlled by Israel. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of four Texans, argues that the law, HB 89, which went into effect last year, violates the First Amendment鈥檚 protection against government intrusion into political speech.
Pluecker V. Paxton. Explore Case.
56
7
89...