All Cases

94 Court Cases
Court Case
Feb 11, 2026
Placeholder image
  • First Amendment Rights|
  • +1 Issue

Doe v. DHS

The “MontCo Community Watch” Facebook and Instagram accounts aim to spread awareness of immigration enforcement activity in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, and to share alerts, documentation, and resources to help inform residents within Montgomery County - regardless of their immigration status-of their rights, due process, and the human dignity all their neighbors inherently hold. Additionally, the accounts inform the local community where ICE agents are publicly conducting immigration enforcement activities within Montgomery County. On September 11, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued two administrative Summonses to Meta Platforms, Inc., citing a federal statute, 19 U.S.C. § 1509, focused on customs investigations relating to merchandise. In the Summonses, DHS demanded constitutionally protected information far outside the scope of the statutory authority—including the identity of the Meta users associated with the MontCo Community Watch social media accounts and IP addresses from which each account had been accessed. The Summonses included no substantiating allegations and did not mention any specific crime or potential customs violation that might trigger an inquiry under the cited statute. In October, we filed an urgent motion to quash the administrative subpoenas on behalf of our client "J. Doe," the account manager, arguing that the subpoena was unlawful on both constitutional grounds, as it violated Doe’s First Amendment rights, and statutory grounds. Our motion sought to protect the identities of those associated with MontCo Community Watch from being exposed to a government agency targeting the community watch group for simply exercising their rights to free speech and association. DHS agreed to withdraw the subpoenas following our legal challenges. In February, we filed a motion for the federal government to cover legal fees for their baseless attempts to access our clients' data. This action comes on the heels of a troubling pattern of similar abusive administrative subpoenas issued by DHS that seek to chill constitutionally protected speech. We're seeking to hold DHS accountable and curb the use of these unlawful subpoenas. See our related case here.
Court Case
Feb 02, 2026
Placeholder image
  • First Amendment Rights|
  • +1 Issue

J Doe v. DHS

In October 2025, our client, “Jon Doe,” read an article in the Washington Post detailing questionable conduct by DHS attorneys attempting to deport an Afghan asylum seeker. In order to express his concern with the government’s actions, Doe sent a short email to the lead DHS attorney named in the Washington Post article, whose official DHS email address he found via a simple Google search. In his email, Doe urged the attorney to “[a]pply principles of common sense and decency” in the asylum seeker’s case. Four hours later, DHS issued an Immigration Enforcement Subpoena to Google, seeking a variety of private information about Doe, his email account, and his use of Google services. Google notified Doe of the subpoena, and he was shocked and frightened by the government’s demand for his personal information. Several weeks after DHS issued the subpoena, two DHS agents and a police officer showed up at Doe’s home and interrogated him about the email he sent. In February, we filed a motion to quash, arguing that the subpoena is unlawful on both constitutional and statutory grounds. Doe’s email to a government official on a matter of public concern is protected under the First Amendment’s free speech and petition clauses. The issuance of the subpoena constitutes unconstitutional retaliation by the government, and has impermissibly chilled Doe’s expression. Our brief also argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1225(d), the federal statute DHS relied upon to issue the subpoena, does not grant authority to issue subpoenas outside the scope of immigration enforcement investigations—meaning that this subpoena retaliating against Doe for his lawful speech lacks statutory grounds.
Court Case
Oct 21, 2025
Placeholder image
  • First Amendment Rights

Wolfe v. Twin Valley School District

The ACLU of Pennsylvania has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Sloane Wolfe, a high school student who has been advocating to end her school district’s use of its “Raider” mascot based on its stereotypical depiction of North American indigenous people.
Court Case
Aug 28, 2025
Wooden gavel
  • First Amendment Rights|
  • +1 Issue

Students for Justice in Palestine at Pitt v. University of Pittsburgh

Court Case
Jul 15, 2025
Placeholder image
  • First Amendment Rights

Murray v. Upper Pottsgrove Township

The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania and Catherine M. Harper of Timoney Knox, LLP filed a lawsuit against Upper Pottsgrove Township on behalf of Matthew Murray, a township resident who was advocating against the development of a piece of permanently protected public land. Mr. Murray filed a number of Right To Know requests to obtain township records regarding the development of the land. Using those records as evidence, Mr. Murray then successfully sued the township alleging that its development plan was in violation of the Pennsylvania Open Space Act. In retaliation, the township sued Mr. Murray in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, asking the court to issue an injunction to prevent Mr. Murray from filing additional Right To Know requests.That request was denied by the court and the township’s case was dismissed. The ACLU-PA’s lawsuit against the township draws on Pennsylvania’s 2024 law allowing a party to assert immunity or seek legal fees against another party for filing a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation or “SLAPP” litigation as a means to silence or intimidate critics. The lawsuit asks Upper Pottsgrove Township to reimburse Mr. Murray for the legal fees he incurred defending himself against the township’s meritless litigation.
Court Case
Nov 20, 2024
Placeholder image
  • First Amendment Rights

Souderton Area For All v. Souderton Area School District

The ACLU of Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against the Souderton Area School District regarding the district's ban of two parents and one former student from school property as retaliation for criticisms leveled at a school board member who posted lewd comments about VP Kamala Harris online.
Court Case
Aug 15, 2024
  • First Amendment Rights|
  • +1 Issue

Re Student Free Speech at Temple University

The ACLU of Pennsylvania is representing two Temple University students who are facing disciplinary action from the university for their participation in a demonstration opposing Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands and its military assault in Gaza.
Court Case
Feb 27, 2024
  • Voting Rights|
  • +2 Issues

ACLU of Pennsylvania, et al. v. York County Board of Elections

Court Case
Apr 10, 2023
  • First Amendment Rights|
  • +2 Issues

Burgess v. Central Bucks School District

The ACLU of PA and the law firm LeVan Stapleton Segal Cochran LLC filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on behalf of teacher Andrew Burgess against the Central Bucks School District.