State Case Database
Search State Court Report's database of significant state supreme court decisions and pending cases. Download decisions and briefs for cases that develop state constitutional law. This is a selected database and does not include every state supreme court case. See methodology and "How to Use the State Case Database" for more information.
This database is updated monthly, although individual cases may be updated more frequently. Last updated comprehensively with cases decided through March 2025.
Featured Cases
Evers v. Marklein
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that statutes permitting a legislative committee to pause, object to, or suspend administrative rules for varying periods of time both before and after promulgation — used by the committee in this case effectively to block for three years a rule banning “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ+ patients — facially violate the state constitution’s bicameralism and presentment requirements.
Kaul v. Urmanski
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an 1849 law, which a local prosecutor had claimed was a near-total abortion ban, is impliedly repealed as to abortion by subsequent legislation and does not ban the procedure in the state.
Contoocook Valley School District v. New Hampshire
The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the state's existing education funding law is constitutionally inadequate and $7,356.01 per pupil as a minimum constitutional guidepost for the legislature, but reversed the trial court's injunction directing the state immediately to pay that amount because the court failed to give adequate weight to separation of powers concerns.
State v. City of San Antonio
Court of Appeals blocked a city from distributing payments under a $100,000 fund created to cover reproductive healthcare costs, which may include out-of-state travel for abortion care, while a full appeal is pending. Preliminarily held the fund violates the state constitution's gift clause because sending residents to undergo procedures out of state that Texas prohibits within the state does not count as a public purpose. Although the city had not yet disbursed any money and argued it still had the option to choose not to pay for out-of-state abortion travel, the panel found it sufficiently likely such payment would occur for the dispute to be ripe.
Planned Parenthood v. Urmanski
Wisconsin Supreme Court dismissed Planned Parenthood's action contending that a 175-year old law, if interpreted by the court to ban abortions, violates pregnant people and their physicians' inherent rights to life and liberty and equal protection under the state constitution. The case was dismissed because the court held in Kaul v. Urmanski that the law does not ban abortions.
Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains and Planned Parenthood Great Rivers v. State of Missouri
Asking the court to declare unconstitutional and block enforcement of Missouri’s ban on abortion, its ban on the use of telemedicine for abortion, the 72-hour waiting period for the procedure, and multiple other restrictive abortion-related laws.
Kaul v. Urmanski
Wisconsin Supreme Court held that an 1849 law, which a local prosecutor had claimed was a near-total abortion ban, is impliedly repealed as to abortion by subsequent legislation and does not ban the procedure in the state.
Isaacson v. Arizona
Healthcare providers seek to block enforcement of remaining abortion restrictions, including an in-person pre-procedure visit requirement, 24-hour waiting period, and telemedicine ban for medication abortions, on the basis that they violate a state constitutional amendment passed in November 2024 that establishes a fundamental right to pre-viability abortion.
Doe v. Uthmeier
A 17-year-old petitioned for a judicial waiver so that she may consent to an abortion without parental notification and consent. A Florida intermediate appellate court held that the judicial waiver law, which allows parental consent to be bypassed upon certain trial court findings, violates parents' due process rights. Anticipating Florida Supreme Court review, the intermediate court certified the question of the law's constitutionality to the state high court.
Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State (Planned Parenthood 1)
Montana Supreme Court held that a 20-week abortion ban; restrictions on medication abortions, including a telehealth ban and 24-hour waiting period; and requirement that providers give patients an opportunity to view an ultrasound and listen to a fetal heartbeat violate the express right to privacy in the state constitution.
Birthmark Doula Collective v. State of Louisiana
Reproductive healthcare providers and advocates challenge a state law that reclassifies mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances, arguing that the law unconstitutionally regulates and delays access to medications that people need for non-abortion reasons, often for emergencies such as postpartum hemorrhage, simply because those medications may also be used for an abortion. They allege the law violates the state constitution's equal protection clause and single-subject and germane-amendment rules.
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic v. South Carolina (Planned Parenthood 2)
South Carolina Supreme Court held that a "fetal heartbeat" — as defined in a state law banning most abortions at the point such a heartbeat is detected — occurs when electrical impulses are first detectable as a "sound" with diagnostic medical technology and a medical professional observes those electrical impulses as a "steady and repetitive rhythmic contraction of the fetal heart." Although declining to define that point in terms of a number of weeks, the court said it "occurs in most instances at approximately six weeks of pregnancy." The court also held that the law is not unconstitutionally vague.
