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

2023
Masterpiece Cake Shop v. Scardina
Question Presented

Whether the State compelling a cake designer to knowingly design, make, and provide a cake to celebrate a transgender transition, even when the creator behind the work vehemently
disagrees with the underlying premise and purpose for which he knows that the cake is being made, violates his First Amendment rights.

2023
NetChoice, LLC v. Moody & Paxton
Question Presented

Whether the First Amendment prohibits viewpoint-, content-, or speaker-based laws restricting select websites from engaging in editorial choices about whether, and how, to publish and disseminate speech — or otherwise burdening those editorial choices through onerous operational and disclosure requirements.

2023
Consumers’ Research v. FCC
Question Presented

(1) Whether 47 U.S.C. § 254 violates the nondelegation doctrine by imposing no limit on the FCC’s power to raise revenue for the Universal Service Fund. (2) Whether the FCC violated the private nondelegation doctrine by transferring its revenue raising power to a private company run by industry interest groups.

2023
Corner Post, Inc., v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Question Presented

Does a plaintiff’s APA claim “first accrue[]” under 28 U.S.C. §2401(a) when an agency issues a rule—regardless of whether that rule injures the plaintiff on that date—or when the rule first causes a plaintiff to “suffer[] legal wrong” or be “adversely affected or aggrieved”?

2023
James Harper v. Daniel Werfel, et al.
Question Presented

Whether the IRS violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause by seizing Mr. Harper’s private financial information from the third-party virtual currency exchange(s) without first providing him with notice and an opportunity to challenge the seizure of his property.

2023
Felkner v. Nazarian et al.
Question Presented

(1) Whether the judge-made “clearly established law” qualified immunity standard, which lacks textual, historical, and logical support, and which does not advance its purported policy objectives, should be abolished or limited; and (2) whether respondents are entitled to qualified immunity on Felkner’s First Amendment claims when they had ample time to reflect and seek legal counsel prior to engaging in a sustained course of conduct that abridged Petitioner’s clearly established First Amendment right to freedom of speech?

2023
SEC v. Jarkesy
Question Presented

1. Whether statutory provisions that empower the SEC to initiate and adjudicate administrative enforcement proceedings seeking civil penalties violate the Seventh Amendment. 2. Whether statutory provisions that authorize the SEC to choose to enforce the securities laws through an agency adjudication instead of filing a district court action violate the nondelegation doctrine. 3. Whether Congress violated Article II by granting for-cause removal protection to administrative law judges in agencies whose heads enjoy for-cause removal protection.

2023
Allstates Refractory Contractors v. Su et al.
Question Presented

2023
Speech First, Inc. v. Sands
Question Presented

Whether university bias-response teams — official entities that solicit, track, and investigate reports of bias; ask to meet with perpetrators; and threaten to refer students for formal discipline — objectively chill students’ speech in violation of the First Amendment.

2023
Newell-Davis v. Phillips
Question Presented

1. Whether the state may deny equal protection of the laws and exclude people from a trade for the sole purpose of easing its regulatory burden, or whether restrictions on the right to enter a common and lawful occupation require more scrutiny. 2. Whether the Supreme Court should overrule the and hold that the right to enter a common and lawful occupation is a privilege or immunity protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.

2023
CFPB v. Community Financial Services Association of America
Question Presented

Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the statute providing funding to the CFPB, 12 U.S.C. 5497, violates the Appropriations Clause, U.S. Const. Art. I,§ 9, Cl. 7, and in vacating a regulation promulgated at a time when the CFPB was receiving such funding.

2023
Illumina v. FTC
Question Presented

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

Amicus Commentary

All
  • All
NetChoice and the “Informational Interest”: Can the Government Ensure You Listen to the Right Message?

The Supreme Court’s decision in NetChoice v. Moody, the much-anticipated challenge to Texas’s regulation of social media companies, was not the barnburner many had anticipated. Instead of deciding the First Amendment question directly, the Court found that neither lower court did the proper facial analysis, meaning they must not only find a First Amendment violation…

Read More about NetChoice and the “Informational Interest”: Can the Government Ensure You Listen to the Right Message?
Americans for Prosperity Foundation releases summary of engagement for Supreme Court October 2023 term

Arlington, VA – Americans for Prosperity Foundation today released a report of its amicus engagement during the October 2023 Supreme Court term.  AFPF Chief Policy Counsel James Valvo said: This term the Supreme Court upheld protections for free expression, ruling the government cannot coerce companies to stop doing business with organizations based on their speech. The…

Read More about Americans for Prosperity Foundation releases summary of engagement for Supreme Court October 2023 term
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