Amicus Briefs

Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Foundation frequently write amicus curiae briefs to support other litigants and present important issues to courts. Please contact us at amicus@afphq.org if you would like amicus support for your case.

Year

Issue Area

Court

2024
Custodia Bank, Inc. v. Federal Reserve Board of Governors et al.
Question Presented

Whether 12 U.S.C. Section 248a permits the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and Federal Reserve Banks to deny an eligible depository institution a master account.

2024
Powell et al. v. SEC
Question Presented

1. Whether the Commission acted contrary to constitutional right by refusing to amend 17 C.F.R. § 202.5(e) because the rule violates First Amendment and due process rights and is against public policy. 2. Whether the Commission acted in excess of statutory authority and without observance of procedure required by law by refusing to amend 17 C.F.R. § 202.5(e), which improperly binds individuals outside of SEC. 3. Whether the Commission acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it failed to provide a reasoned explanation for denying the petition to amend 17 C.F.R. § 202.5(e).

2024
Iowa et al. v. SEC
Question Presented

Whether SEC exceeded its authority when it enacted the Rule, which attempts to address a major question without clear authorization from Congress.

2024
National Small Business United v. U.S. Department of Treasury
Question Presented

Whether the Corporate Transparency Act exceeds Congress’s powers by requiring entities formed under State law to report personal information of their owners and applicants solely due to the fact of their formation, regardless of whether they participate in interstate commerce.

2024
Villarreal v. City of Laredo
Question Presented

Whether qualified immunity precludes a First Amendment claim against police officers who arrested a reporter for asking an officer to confirm information she was planning to use in a news article.

2024
United States of America v. Pheasant
Question Presented

Whether 43 U.S.C. § 1733, which provides broad, open-ended criminal authority to the Bureau of Land Management, violates the nondelegation doctrine.

2024
Cigar Association of America et al. v. FDA
Question Presented

Whether the District Court correctly held that the FDA’s decision to regulate premium cigars violated the APA because the FDA failed to address evidence and comments directly responsive to a “crucial question” posed in the Proposed Rule?

2024
In Re Bates Minors
Question Presented

Are the courts required to apply strict scrutiny when determining whether parental rights over their children should be permanently severed.

2024
Intuit v. FTC
Question Presented

Whether the FTC’s administrative prosecution violated the U.S. Constitution, including Article II, Article III, and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and whether the FTC’s Order is therefore void ab initio.

2024
No On E v. Chiu
Question Presented

(1) Whether requiring political advertisers to name their donors’ donors within their advertisements advances any important or compelling state interest; and (2) whether San Francisco’s secondary donor speech mandate violates the First Amendment freedoms of speech and association.

2024
In re Sapphire W.
Question Presented

Does a family court order, which authorizes Child Services to enter and search an innocent mother’s home and supervise her parenting, violate the mother’s  Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches?

2024
Human Rights Defense Center v. United States Park Police
Question Presented

Does a federal court enjoy inherent authority to order the return or destruction of records released under the Freedom of Information Act, even when such disclosure is allegedly inadvertent, or can it alternatively prohibit further use or dissemination of such records by their recipient.

Amicus Commentary

All
  • All
Have you heard of these cases before the Supreme Court? Here’s why they should matter to you

UPDATE: On 5/30/2024, in a win for the First Amendment, the Supreme Court unanimously decided in NRA v. Vullo that government officials cannot pressure or otherwise coerce organizations to terminate certain business relationships when doing so infringes the First Amendment rights of the third party. This Supreme Court term has been full of high-profile cases.…

Read More about Have you heard of these cases before the Supreme Court? Here’s why they should matter to you
Congress, not bureaucrats, should make federal criminal law

By Michael Pepson Would it surprise you to know that Congress has granted the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) unfettered power to write its own criminal code governing one-tenth of the land in the United States? A Nevada federal court ruled that Congress unconstitutionally transferred its legislative power to write crimes to the BLM. Last…

Read More about Congress, not bureaucrats, should make federal criminal law
Freelancing or free speech? California’s AB5 gets speaking professionals coming and going

Threats to free speech can be veiled as restrictions on economic activity. California’s AB5 is the latest example. Many people who don’t prefer traditional office environments have benefited from independent contracting. From freelance photographers to truckers to massage therapists, workers can find freedom in setting their own hours and being their own boss. California took…

Read More about Freelancing or free speech? California’s AB5 gets speaking professionals coming and going
Censorship by stealth: Can government officials censor speech by pressuring third parties to do it for them?

For this newsletter, I’m delighted to have Cindy Crawford, AFPF Senior Policy Counsel, take over to discuss censorship by stealth and two upcoming cases in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. – Casey UPDATE: On 5/30/2024, in a win for the First Amendment, the Supreme Court unanimously decided in NRA v. Vullo that government officials…

Read More about Censorship by stealth: Can government officials censor speech by pressuring third parties to do it for them?
The Supreme Court can stop unelected bureaucrats and private corporations from imposing taxes

Americans for Prosperity Foundation recently filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Consumers’ Research v. Federal Communications Commission, urging the Court to grant Consumers Research’s cert petition and enforce the Constitution’s system of checks and balances. At issue is the constitutionality of the Universal Service Fund, a social welfare program that subsidizes certain consumers’ telecommunications services at…

Read More about The Supreme Court can stop unelected bureaucrats and private corporations from imposing taxes
Corner Post gives Supreme Court a chance to keep the courthouse doors open to new businesses harmed by stale, lawless regulations

by Michael Pepson Americans for Prosperity Foundation filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Corner Post, Inc. v. The Federal Reserve, urging the Court to allow Corner Post’s challenge to a 2011 debit-fees regulation that Corner Post believes to be beyond the Board’s power.  The question presented may seem dry: when does…

Read More about Corner Post gives Supreme Court a chance to keep the courthouse doors open to new businesses harmed by stale, lawless regulations
303 Creative LLC v Elenis: The Biggest Supreme Court Free Speech Case You Might Not Have Heard About

A small independent website designer in Colorado is getting national attention. Why? The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case next week about whether the government can force her to say something that goes against her personal beliefs. It’s one of the biggest free speech cases this Supreme Court term. And you may not have…

Read More about 303 Creative LLC v Elenis: The Biggest Supreme Court Free Speech Case You Might Not Have Heard About
Tiwari v. Friedlander asks: Is depriving patients of medical services rational?

Commonplace in the market for medical services, certificate-of-need  laws prohibit medical providers from practicing or expanding unless they can demonstrate not only “need” for their proposed services but also survive a bureaucratic gauntlet that can take years, cost thousands of dollars, and allow competitors — existing and potential — to challenge the application. The result…

Read More about Tiwari v. Friedlander asks: Is depriving patients of medical services rational?