The Institute for Justice fights to end government abuses of power and defends constitutional rights, empowering Americans to pursue their dreams. To end these abuses, IJ challenges the government at all legal levels, including the U.S. Supreme Court, where it has argued 13 cases spanning property rights, educational choice, economic liberty, and free speech. By winning at the highest court, IJ aims to create broad, positive impacts for all Americans.

13

Cases Litigated at the Supreme Court

6wins in6years

IJ has won a total of 10 cases before the court, with six wins in the last six years.

1out of5

IJ's petitions to the Supreme Court are granted at a rate substantially above the national average, on par with the most respected members of the Supreme Court bar.

Currently at the Court

Cert Granted

Martin vs. United States

The FBI Raided the Wrong Home—the Government Refuses to Pay for the Damage

Pending Cert Petitions

Humboldt Abatements

California Mapping

Entrepreneur Fined $1,000 for Using Public Information to Draw Lines on Maps Files Federal Lawsuit Against California

Midland Prosecutor

Former Texas Prosecutor Worked as a Law Clerk in His Own Cases, Giving the Government an Unfair Advantage Over Those He Prosecuted

North Carolina Drones

North Carolina’s Surveying Board Grounds Small-Business Drone Operators

Texas Veterinary Speech II

Texas Veterinarian Renews Fight to Give Professional Advice Online

Impact

Timbs v. Indiana

Timbs v. Indiana

There ARE Limits: IJ Takes Excessive Fines Case to the U.S. Supreme Court

  • In the aftermath of IJ’s landmark win in Timbs v. Indiana, the courts of 19 states have expressly acknowledged that their states are bound by the Excessive Fines Clause. While there is still plenty of work to do in developing caselaw under the Clause, the fact that the Excessive Fines Clause applies to the states gives advocates two court systems—state and federal—in which they can raise Excessive Fines Clause claims.
  • IJ’s multiple trips to the Indiana Supreme Court in State v. Timbs produced the most rigorous excessive fines clause analysis by any court to date. While other state courts have yet to adopt the reasoning of the Indiana Supreme Court in their own interpretation of the Excessive Fines Clause or their state constitutional counterparts, the opinion will serve as a guide for litigants and courts as the law develops.

View Case
Carson v. Makin

Carson v. Makin

Maine Families Fight for School Choice in U.S. Supreme Court Appeal

  • Carson v. Makin marked the culmination of IJ’s decades-long effort to establish the clear and unambiguous constitutionality of school choice programs nationwide.
  • The decision ensured that religious options cannot be excluded from school choice programs, clearing the way for the expansion of educational freedom across the country.
  • As a result of IJ’s Supreme Court victories—including Carson—more than 5.3 million scholarships have been dispensed to students, and Carson helped pave the way for four universal choice programs enacted in 2025 alone.

View Case
Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. Thomas

Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. Thomas

Can States Bar Newcomers from Owning a Business?

  • Thanks to our win in Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. Thomas, Tennessee no longer requires residency as a condition for a liquor license.
  • Since then six other states have amended their laws to remove their durational residency requirements: Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, and Virginia.

View Case

Our Supreme Court Cases