Ohio

Featured

U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2015
Jim Obergefell

LGBTQ Rights

Obergefell, et al. v. Hodges - Freedom to Marry in Ohio

The Ƶ, the Ƶof Ohio and Alphonse Gerhardstein of Gerhardstein & Branch have filed suit on behalf of Jim Obergefell and David Michener, two widowers, and Robert Grunn, a funeral director, in a challenge to the Ohio constitutional and statutory marriage recognition bans.
Obergefell, Et Al. V. Hodges - Freedom To Marry In Ohio. Explore Case.

All Cases

26 Ohio Cases

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al. v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.
Ohio
Feb 2026

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al. v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.

In December 2020, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 27, a fetal tissue disposal requirement that mandates burial or cremation of all embryonic and fetal tissue from a procedural abortion, imposing severe burdens on patients and stigmatizing essential care. On January 31, 2022, an Ohio judge preliminarily enjoined the law, finding that the law likely violates the Ohio state constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection. The victory followed a previous April 5, 2021, preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the law, because compliance would have been impossible due to the Ohio Department of Health’s (ODH) failure to establish necessary rules and regulations. In April 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint, adding a claim that the law violated the newly established Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment of the Ohio Constitution, and in August 2024 filed a 12(C) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, arguing that Senate Bill 27 is unconstitutional as a matter of law under that Amendment for discriminatorily targeting procedural abortion. In February 2025, the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas agreed, granting the Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings and permanently enjoining enforcement of Senate Bill 27. In February 2026, the Ohio First District Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's permanent injunction, ruling that the requirements under Senate Bill 27 violate the state constitution's Reproductive Freedom Amendment, which took effect in December 2023 after being approved by voters. This lawsuit was filed by the Ƶ, Ƶof Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm on behalf of Ohio abortion providers.
Explore case
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Et Al. V. Ohio Department Of Health, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Ohio
Feb 2026
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al. v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.

Reproductive Freedom

Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, et al. v. Ohio Department of Health, et al.

In December 2020, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed into law Senate Bill 27, a fetal tissue disposal requirement that mandates burial or cremation of all embryonic and fetal tissue from a procedural abortion, imposing severe burdens on patients and stigmatizing essential care. On January 31, 2022, an Ohio judge preliminarily enjoined the law, finding that the law likely violates the Ohio state constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection. The victory followed a previous April 5, 2021, preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the law, because compliance would have been impossible due to the Ohio Department of Health’s (ODH) failure to establish necessary rules and regulations. In April 2024, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint, adding a claim that the law violated the newly established Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment of the Ohio Constitution, and in August 2024 filed a 12(C) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, arguing that Senate Bill 27 is unconstitutional as a matter of law under that Amendment for discriminatorily targeting procedural abortion. In February 2025, the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas agreed, granting the Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings and permanently enjoining enforcement of Senate Bill 27. In February 2026, the Ohio First District Court of Appeals upheld the trial court's permanent injunction, ruling that the requirements under Senate Bill 27 violate the state constitution's Reproductive Freedom Amendment, which took effect in December 2023 after being approved by voters. This lawsuit was filed by the Ƶ, Ƶof Ohio, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, and Fanon Rucker of the Cochran Law Firm on behalf of Ohio abortion providers.
Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region, Et Al. V. Ohio Department Of Health, Et Al.. Explore Case.
Ohio Dropbox
Ohio
Feb 2026

Voting Rights

League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose

Voting-rights and civil-rights organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Ohio law that threatens to wrongly strip eligible citizens—particularly naturalized citizens—of their right to vote.   The case arises from Ohio Senate Bill 293 (SB 293), a law that mandates aggressive, automated purges of Ohio’s voter rolls based on flawed citizenship data. Under SB 293, state officials are required to conduct frequent database checks and cancel voter registrations for people flagged as “noncitizens”—often without advance notice or a meaningful opportunity to correct mistakes.   Plaintiffs brought this case to stop a system that places thousands of eligible voters at risk of disenfranchisement and undermines fundamental protections guaranteed by federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
Explore case
League Of Women Voters Of Ohio V. Larose. Explore Case.
Ohio
Feb 2026
Ohio Dropbox

Voting Rights

League of Women Voters of Ohio v. LaRose

Voting-rights and civil-rights organizations filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Ohio law that threatens to wrongly strip eligible citizens—particularly naturalized citizens—of their right to vote.   The case arises from Ohio Senate Bill 293 (SB 293), a law that mandates aggressive, automated purges of Ohio’s voter rolls based on flawed citizenship data. Under SB 293, state officials are required to conduct frequent database checks and cancel voter registrations for people flagged as “noncitizens”—often without advance notice or a meaningful opportunity to correct mistakes.   Plaintiffs brought this case to stop a system that places thousands of eligible voters at risk of disenfranchisement and undermines fundamental protections guaranteed by federal law and the U.S. Constitution.
League Of Women Voters Of Ohio V. Larose. Explore Case.
Moe v. Yost
Ohio
Jan 2026

LGBTQ Rights

Moe v. Yost

Two transgender adolescents and their families are challenging Ohio’s House Bill 68, a law passed in January 2024 that prohibits gender-affirming medical care that is widely accepted to treat gender dysphoria, helping alleviate the distress of gender dysphoria and significantly improving patients’ mental health and well-being. Such treatment is supported by leading medical experts and all major U.S. medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Explore case
Moe V. Yost. Explore Case.
Ohio
Jan 2026
Moe v. Yost

LGBTQ Rights

Moe v. Yost

Two transgender adolescents and their families are challenging Ohio’s House Bill 68, a law passed in January 2024 that prohibits gender-affirming medical care that is widely accepted to treat gender dysphoria, helping alleviate the distress of gender dysphoria and significantly improving patients’ mental health and well-being. Such treatment is supported by leading medical experts and all major U.S. medical organizations, including the American Medical Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Moe V. Yost. Explore Case.
Ohio Dropbox
Ohio Supreme Court
Oct 2024

Voting Rights

Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose (Amicus)

Just weeks before absentee voting begins in Ohio, Secretary LaRose issued Directive 2024-21 to curtail the use of drop boxes. The directive deprives everyone who is lawfully assisting another voter from using a drop box, and mandates that drop boxes may be used only by voters who are returning their own ballot. We filed an amicus brief to explain the harsh, unnecessary burdens this directive will impose on voters and election officials alike.
Explore case
Ohio Democratic Party V. Larose (amicus). Explore Case.
Ohio Supreme Court
Oct 2024
Ohio Dropbox

Voting Rights

Ohio Democratic Party v. LaRose (Amicus)

Just weeks before absentee voting begins in Ohio, Secretary LaRose issued Directive 2024-21 to curtail the use of drop boxes. The directive deprives everyone who is lawfully assisting another voter from using a drop box, and mandates that drop boxes may be used only by voters who are returning their own ballot. We filed an amicus brief to explain the harsh, unnecessary burdens this directive will impose on voters and election officials alike.
Ohio Democratic Party V. Larose (amicus). Explore Case.
State v. Morris
Ohio Supreme Court
Sep 2024

Prisoners' Rights

State v. Morris

This case in the Ohio Supreme Court concerns the scope of the state constitutional right to counsel. The police in this case interrogated the defendant, Isaiah Morris, without mentioning his already-appointed counsel or asking him to waive his right to counsel. This procedural circumstance risks confusing criminal defendants and undermining their state constitutional rights. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the Ƶof Ohio and WilmerHale, filed an amicus brief arguing that merely providing a defendant notice of Miranda rights falls short of the bare minimum requirements for a valid waiver.
Explore case
State V. Morris. Explore Case.
Ohio Supreme Court
Sep 2024
State v. Morris

Prisoners' Rights

State v. Morris

This case in the Ohio Supreme Court concerns the scope of the state constitutional right to counsel. The police in this case interrogated the defendant, Isaiah Morris, without mentioning his already-appointed counsel or asking him to waive his right to counsel. This procedural circumstance risks confusing criminal defendants and undermining their state constitutional rights. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the Ƶof Ohio and WilmerHale, filed an amicus brief arguing that merely providing a defendant notice of Miranda rights falls short of the bare minimum requirements for a valid waiver.
State V. Morris. Explore Case.
1
23...