Arizona
Fund for Empowerment v. Phoenix, City of
Fund for Empowerment is a challenge to the City of Phoenix’s practice of conducting sweeps of encampments without notice, issuing citations to unsheltered people for camping and sleeping on public property when they have no place else to go, and confiscating and destroying their property without notice or process.
Status: Ongoing
View Case
Featured
Arizona
Apr 2023
Prisoners' Rights
Jensen v. Thornell
UPDATE: In a thorough and sweeping injunction issued on April 7, 2023, U.S. District Judge Roslyn O. Silver is requiring the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry (“ADCRR”) to make “substantial” changes to staffing and conditions so that medical care and mental healthcare at Arizona prisons comes up to constitutional standards.
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
32 Arizona Cases
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2012
Immigrants' Rights
Arizona v. United States
Whether Arizona's effort to enforce federal immigration law by creating its own rules for the interrogation, arrest and detention of undocumented persons is unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2012
Immigrants' Rights
Arizona v. United States
Whether Arizona's effort to enforce federal immigration law by creating its own rules for the interrogation, arrest and detention of undocumented persons is unconstitutional under the Supremacy Clause.
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2011
Immigrants' Rights
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
(formerly Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria)
Whether an Arizona law imposing severe sanctions on employers who hire immigrants that the state believes are unauthorized to work in the United States, and requiring employers to participate in a federal employment verification program that the federal government made voluntary, is pre-empted by the carefully calibrated and comprehensive scheme that the federal government has enacted to regulate immigration.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
May 2011
Immigrants' Rights
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting
(formerly Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria)
Whether an Arizona law imposing severe sanctions on employers who hire immigrants that the state believes are unauthorized to work in the United States, and requiring employers to participate in a federal employment verification program that the federal government made voluntary, is pre-empted by the carefully calibrated and comprehensive scheme that the federal government has enacted to regulate immigration.
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2011
Religious Liberty
Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn
Whether Arizona’s use of tax credits funneled through state-certified and state-supervised non-profits to award student scholarships based on religious criteria and for use in religious schools violates the Establishment Clause.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Apr 2011
Religious Liberty
Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn
Whether Arizona’s use of tax credits funneled through state-certified and state-supervised non-profits to award student scholarships based on religious criteria and for use in religious schools violates the Establishment Clause.
Arizona
Sep 2010
Smart Justice
Immigrants' Rights
Chamber of Commerce of the United States et al. v. Candelaria
This is the first case to reach the Supreme Court that raises the constitutionality of the growing number of state and local anti-immigrant laws that have been enacted in recent years. The ACLU represents certain petitioners in the case.
Explore case
Arizona
Sep 2010
Smart Justice
Immigrants' Rights
Chamber of Commerce of the United States et al. v. Candelaria
This is the first case to reach the Supreme Court that raises the constitutionality of the growing number of state and local anti-immigrant laws that have been enacted in recent years. The ACLU represents certain petitioners in the case.
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2010
Smart Justice
Criminal Law Reform
Safford Unified School District v. Redding
Whether school officials acted unconstitutionally by strip searching a 13-year-old girl based on the uncorroborated accusation of a fellow student and, if so, whether the strip search was so clearly unconstitutional that plaintiff is entitled to damages.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Jul 2010
Smart Justice
Criminal Law Reform
Safford Unified School District v. Redding
Whether school officials acted unconstitutionally by strip searching a 13-year-old girl based on the uncorroborated accusation of a fellow student and, if so, whether the strip search was so clearly unconstitutional that plaintiff is entitled to damages.