Head-to-head
Caryn Devins Strickland, Petitioner v. Nancy L. Moritz, Judge, In Her Official Capacity as Chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Resources, et al. vs. Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, Ohio vs. Daniel Richard v. Kelly Ayotte, Governor of New Hampshire
Civil Rights cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
The matchup
Docket 25-1303Caryn Devins Strickland, Petitioner v. Nancy L. Moritz, Judge, In Her Official Capacity as Chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Resources, et al.Before argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-1361Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, OhioBefore argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-1390Daniel Richard v. Kelly Ayotte, Governor of New HampshireBefore argumentOctober Term 2025
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Civil Rights
- Why compared
- Reviewed Civil Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.
Questions presented
- Caryn Devins Strickland, Petitioner v. Nancy L. Moritz, Judge, In Her Official Capacity as Chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Resources, et al.
- 1. Whether the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection clauses permit the federal judiciary to require its employees to adjudicate sexual harassment and employment discrimination claims through an internal system that lacks an independent decisionmaker, meaningful procedural safeguards, and adequate remedies, rather than affording the essential protections available under Title VII. 2. Whether a circuit’s EDR Plan that does not comport with Title VII’s fundamental principles violates the Congressional Accountability Act and policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States promulgated in accordance thereto.
- Steve Snyder, et al., Petitioners v. Village of Luckey, Ohio
- 1. Whether this Court’s Opinion in Knick, supra, permits a federal cause of action against a municipal entity for an uncompensated physical taking when the municipal entity has materially impaired the value and precluded the alienability of the Petitioners’ property. 2. Whether the actions of the Village in singling out the Petitioners’ property and engaging in concerted actions to prevent its sale at auction are sufficient to state a claim for violation of Petitioners’ rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
- Daniel Richard v. Kelly Ayotte, Governor of New Hampshire
- 1. Whether the New Hampshire Supreme Court denied meaningful judicial review under the Elections Clause and Qualifications Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, in violation of Moore v. Harper, 600 U.S. 1 (2023), by declaring N.H. Const, pt. II, art. 32 “silent” on the method of ballot counting expressly required by that provision and by disregarding its own binding precedent in Fischer v. Governor, 145 N.H. 28 (2000). 2. Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, as interpreted in Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000), and Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964), is violated when a state court dismisses as a non-justiciable “generalized grievance” a qualified voter’s claim that his in-person, hand-counted ballot—cast under strict constitutional verification standards, was commingled and tabulated with hundreds of thousands of absentee and machine-counted ballots processed under materially weaker verification and transparency standards.
Go deeper
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.