Source: https://aclu.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000300
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 03:47:06+00:00

Document:
The 500 case summaries below are a representative sample of the 749 cases in which the ACLU was involved at the US Supreme Court level (overwhelmingly as amicus filers), from their first case decided on June 8, 1925 through Dec. 31, 1999.
These "layman" summaries are targeted primarily for non-lawyers, so the case descriptions and related information are in straightforward easily understood language.
Some of the summaries and case descriptions presented were written by law students and researchers, and therefore may be missing some important legal nuances or contain erroneous data. However, in the majority of the cases, in order to avoid rewriting or reinterpreting the opinion of the Court, we used verbatim the relevant portions of the case summaries and opinions as published by the Supreme Court. We are in discussions to have all 749 case summaries published in print form.
Thank you to the following volunteers and interns for their research contributions to this project (in alphabetical order): Erica Bianco, Elena Colle, Rachel Espana, Grant Hubbard, Ian Li, Christopher Lippi, Johnny Lo, Jamie Lowry, Allison Martins, Melanie McClinnis, Dillon McGrew, Pavan Nagavelli, Robyn Nolan, Lindsey Phoenix, Kimberlee Ray, Tracey Resetar, Jonathan Saine, Hanna Terhaar, Sigrid Hsi-Ju Yang, and Gulcin Yilmazer.
All cases argued and decided in the United States Supreme Court, in which the ACLU was involved as a party, counsel, or amicus ("friend of the Court"), in chronological order (oldest first).
See our Glossary for a definition of legal terms used in the cases, such as amicus curiae, respondent, appellee, petitioner, appellant, writ, and certiorari.
Raymond K. Procunier v. Apolinar Navarette, Jr.
Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. et al.
Bose Corporation v. Consumers Union of US, Inc.
City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc.
Automobile Workers v. Johnson Controls, Inc.
Federal Election Commission (FEC) v. Akins, et al.
Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc.
This work has simply defined "winning" or "losing" by whether or not the ruling of The Court was "with" or "against" the side the ACLU was on, even though there are instances where the ACLU was on the "winning side" but felt they lost and, conversely, where they were on the "losing side" but may have received a benefit from the decision.
It is established that in the cases of ties, where the Supreme Court ruling has an equally divided 4-4 vote, the equally divided decision reaffirms the ruling below because petitioner/appellant needs 5 votes to overturn a judgment. In that case, we count the decision as an ACLU "win" or "loss" depending on whether the ACLU position was seeking affirmance or reversal of the judgment below.
When the Supreme Court's ruling goes part in favor and part against the ACLU position, we consider "winning" or "losing" according to whether the Court's line of reasoning in its argument was "with" or "against" the ACLU position.
In per curiam decisions, the Court issued decisions usually without making public the individual Justices' voting record. In such cases, we have categorized these decisions as unanimous "wins" or "losses" - unless an individual Justice had issued an opinion indicating their own position and adjusted the unanimous vote accordingly (i.e., if it is a concurring opinion, the vote remains unanimous; however, in the case of dissenting opinions, the unanimity of the vote fails).
Should the Government Allow Immigrants Who Are Here Illegally to Become US Citizens?

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.