Texas
Crystal Mason v. State of Texas
Crystal Mason thought she was performing her civic duty by filling out a provisional ballot in the 2016 election. She didn't know it would land her a five-year prison sentence, upending her family and the life she had built. At the time, Ms. Mason was on federal supervised release, a preliminary period of freedom for individuals who have served their full time of incarceration in federal prison. Ms. Mason didn’t know, and nobody told her, that the state considered her ineligible to vote while on supervised release. Because her name didn’t appear on voter rolls, she filed a provisional ballot, consistent with federal law. The state never counted her ballot but has still sought to send her to prison for an innocent mistake.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View Case
Visit ACLU of Texas
Featured
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2023
![United States v. Rahimi](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
United States v. Rahimi
Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face.
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jun 2023
![Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Danco Laboratories, LLC, v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine
The American Civil Liberties Union 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 — a medication used in most abortions in this country — and threatened the innovation of new drugs and the ability of Americans to access lifesaving drugs.
Status: Stayed
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
![Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson
The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU 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—before many know they are pregnant. The ACLU’s 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’s 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’ abortion ban will remain in effect until relief can be secured from a court.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
Texas
Jul 2021
![Sanchez et al v. Dallas County Sheriff et al](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
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 ACLU 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.
Status: Ongoing
View case
Stay informed about our latest work in the courts.
By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU's privacy statement.
All Cases
38 Texas Cases
Texas
Dec 2023
![vbm](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/vbm-600x400.jpg)
Vote.Org v. Callanen (Amicus)
Texas requires voters who register to vote electronically or via fax to mail an original copy with the voter’s “wet signature” to the applicable registrar. A voter may be denied registration merely because the mailed copy of the form has a scanned signature on it rather than a “wet ink” one. But the Civil Rights Act prohibits states from disenfranchising voters based on immaterial paperwork errors. We’re fighting to make sure that every vote counts and supported Vote.org’s challenge to the “wet ink” law as unlawful under the Civil Rights Act.
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![vbm](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/vbm-600x400.jpg)
Texas
Voting Rights
Vote.Org v. Callanen (Amicus)
Texas requires voters who register to vote electronically or via fax to mail an original copy with the voter’s “wet signature” to the applicable registrar. A voter may be denied registration merely because the mailed copy of the form has a scanned signature on it rather than a “wet ink” one. But the Civil Rights Act prohibits states from disenfranchising voters based on immaterial paperwork errors. We’re fighting to make sure that every vote counts and supported Vote.org’s challenge to the “wet ink” law as unlawful under the Civil Rights Act.
Dec 2023
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
Texas
Nov 2023
![Black girl runner crossing the red victory ribbon](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/shutterstock_2229889683-600x459.jpg)
Spring Branch ISD Advocacy – Dress Code Discrimination
On March 1, 2023, WRP and the ACLU of 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.
View case
![Black girl runner crossing the red victory ribbon](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/03/shutterstock_2229889683-600x459.jpg)
Texas
Women's Rights
Free Speech
Spring Branch ISD Advocacy – Dress Code Discrimination
On March 1, 2023, WRP and the ACLU of 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.
Nov 2023
View case
Texas
Sep 2023
![Free Speech Coalition v. Colmenero](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Free Speech Coalition v. Colmenero
Texas H.B. 1181, if allowed to go into effect, will impermissibly burden access to protected online speech by requiring users to verify their ages before accessing legal adult content online. The law will also unconstitutionally compel websites that carry lawful, fully protected sexual material to post “disclosure” statements reflecting Texas’s views about pornography.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Free Speech Coalition v. Colmenero](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Texas
Free Speech
Free Speech Coalition v. Colmenero
Texas H.B. 1181, if allowed to go into effect, will impermissibly burden access to protected online speech by requiring users to verify their ages before accessing legal adult content online. The law will also unconstitutionally compel websites that carry lawful, fully protected sexual material to post “disclosure” statements reflecting Texas’s views about pornography.
Sep 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2023
![Past Due Bill](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB18-PastDueBill-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
Daves v. Dallas County
Whether federal courts have the power to remedy systemic unconstitutional pretrial detention practices that remain unchecked by state courts.
Status: Ongoing
View case
![Past Due Bill](https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2023/01/WEB18-PastDueBill-1160x864-600x447.jpg)
U.S. Supreme Court
Smart Justice
Criminal Law Reform
Daves v. Dallas County
Whether federal courts have the power to remedy systemic unconstitutional pretrial detention practices that remain unchecked by state courts.
Jul 2023
Status: Ongoing
View case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2023
![Reed v. Goertz](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
Reed v. Goertz
When a prisoner pursues state post-conviction DNA testing through the state-provided litigation process, when does the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 procedural due process claim begin to run?
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case
![Reed v. Goertz](https://www.aclu.dev/wp-content/themes/aclu-wp/img/fallback-case-gavel.png)
U.S. Supreme Court
Capital Punishment
Reed v. Goertz
When a prisoner pursues state post-conviction DNA testing through the state-provided litigation process, when does the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 procedural due process claim begin to run?
May 2023
Status: Closed (Judgment)
View case