South Carolina
Misanin v. Wilson
Transgender South Carolinians and their families challenged a 2024 state law banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth and prohibiting any state funds from supporting access to gender-affirming medical care. South Carolina鈥檚 ban led to medical providers ending treatment for transgender patients regardless of age.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
All Cases
18 South Carolina Cases
South Carolina
Jan 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Free Speech
O.R. v. Greenville County, South Carolina
Local library patrons, with help from the 老熟女午夜福利 and ACLU of South Carolina, are suing officials in South Carolina鈥檚 most populous county for systematically purging literature by and about lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people from its public library collection.
Explore case
South Carolina
Jan 2026
LGBTQ Rights
Free Speech
O.R. v. Greenville County, South Carolina
Local library patrons, with help from the 老熟女午夜福利 and ACLU of South Carolina, are suing officials in South Carolina鈥檚 most populous county for systematically purging literature by and about lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people from its public library collection.
South Carolina
Dec 2025
Voting Rights
NAACP South Carolina State Conference v. Wilson
All voters with disabilities have the right to receive assistance voting from a person of their choice. South Carolina prohibits some voters with disabilities from receiving assistance and limits who voters can rely on for assistance. Voters with disabilities and the NAACP South Carolina State Conference sued to challenge those laws under Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act and protect disabled voters鈥� right to assistance.
Explore case
South Carolina
Dec 2025
Voting Rights
NAACP South Carolina State Conference v. Wilson
All voters with disabilities have the right to receive assistance voting from a person of their choice. South Carolina prohibits some voters with disabilities from receiving assistance and limits who voters can rely on for assistance. Voters with disabilities and the NAACP South Carolina State Conference sued to challenge those laws under Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act and protect disabled voters鈥� right to assistance.
South Carolina Supreme Court
Sep 2025
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
This case involves a state constitutional challenge to South Carolina鈥檚 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state鈥檚 federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state鈥檚 Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
Explore case
South Carolina Supreme Court
Sep 2025
Voting Rights
League of Women Voters of South Carolina v. Alexander
This case involves a state constitutional challenge to South Carolina鈥檚 2022 congressional redistricting plan, which legislators admit was drawn to entrench a 6-1 Republican majority in the state鈥檚 federal delegation. Plaintiff the League of Women Voters of South Carolina has asked the state鈥檚 Supreme Court to conclude that the congressional map is an unlawful partisan gerrymander that violates the state constitution.
South Carolina Supreme Court
Nov 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood聽South聽Atlantic v. Wilson
This case in the South Carolina Supreme Court involves the question of whether a ban on abortion, the 鈥�2023 Fetal Heartbeat Act,鈥� forbids abortion starting after approximately nine weeks of pregnancy or, as the state contends, earlier at six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they are pregnant. This case is the third state supreme court proceeding in South Carolina involving a post-Dobbs challenge to an abortion ban. The outcome will substantially affect access to reproductive care in the state.
Explore case
South Carolina Supreme Court
Nov 2024
Reproductive Freedom
Planned Parenthood聽South聽Atlantic v. Wilson
This case in the South Carolina Supreme Court involves the question of whether a ban on abortion, the 鈥�2023 Fetal Heartbeat Act,鈥� forbids abortion starting after approximately nine weeks of pregnancy or, as the state contends, earlier at six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they are pregnant. This case is the third state supreme court proceeding in South Carolina involving a post-Dobbs challenge to an abortion ban. The outcome will substantially affect access to reproductive care in the state.