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

2025
Wilcox v. Trump
Question Presented

Whether the President has authority under Article II of the Constitution to remove a Member of the National Labor Relations Board without first having to bear the burden of establishing neglect of duty or malfeasance in office.

2025
Harper v. O’Donnell
Question Presented

Does the Fourth Amendment permit warrantless searches of customer records held by third-party service providers if the records are contractually owned by the customer, or if those records enable surveillance of future behavior? If not, does the third-party doctrine need to be discarded or modified to prevent such searches?

2025
Aaron Richards et al. v. Administration for Children’s Services
Question Presented

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

2025
Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond
Question Presented

1. Whether the academic and pedagogical choices of a privately owned and run school constitute state action simply because it contracts with the state to offer a free educational option for interested students.
2. Whether a state violates the Free Exercise Clause by excluding privately run religious schools from the stateโ€™s charter-school program solely because the schools are religious, or whether a state can justify such an exclusion by invoking anti-establishment interests that go further than the Establishment Clause requires.

2025
Mahmoud v. Taylor
Question Presented

Whether public schools burden parentsโ€™ religious exercise when they compel elementary school children to participate in instruction on gender and sexuality against their parentsโ€™ religious convictions and without notice or opportunity to opt out.

2025
Texas Top Cop Shop v. Bondi
Question Presented

Whether the Corporate Transparency Act exceeds constitutional limits on the federal governmentโ€™s powers.

2025
First Choice v. Platkin
Question Presented

Where the subject of a state investigatory demand has established a reasonably objective chill of its First Amendment rights, is a federal court in a first-filed action deprived of jurisdiction because those rights must be adjudicated in state court.

2025
FCC v. Consumersโ€™ Research
Question Presented

Whether 47 U.S.C. ยง 254 violates the nondelegation doctrine by imposing no objective limit on the revenue to be raised for the Universal Service Fund. 2. Whether the FCC violates the private nondelegation doctrine by transferring its revenue raising power to the Universal Service Administrative Company, a private company run by industry interest groups. 3. Whether the combination of those two delegations violates the nondelegation doctrine. Whether this case is moot in light of the challengersโ€™ failure to seek preliminary relief before the Fifth Circuit.

2025
Jakeโ€™s Fireworks v. CPSC
Question Presented

Whether judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act for CPSC notices of violation is unavailable until the agency further acts through formal enforcement.

2025
Lesh v. United States
Question Presented

Whether the Constitutionโ€™s dual guarantee of trial by jury contains an unstated exception for โ€œpetty offenses.โ€

2024
Salaam v. Trump
Question Presented

2024
McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice
Question Presented

Whether a federal ban on at-home distilling of spiritsโ€”even for personal useโ€”exceeds constitutional limits on the federal governmentโ€™s powers.

Amicus Commentary

All
  • All
Narrow question in Supreme Court campus speech case has broad First Amendment implications

The Supreme Court hears oral argument today in Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, addressing whether โ€œa governmentโ€™s post-filing change of an unconstitutional policy moots nominal-damages claims that vindicate the government’s past, completed violation of a plaintiffโ€™s constitutional right.โ€ Translation? The justices are deciding whether people whose rights have been violated should have their day in court even…

Read More about Narrow question in Supreme Court campus speech case has broad First Amendment implications
SCOTUS has chance to clarify the muddy waters of takings jurisprudence in Cedar Point v. Hassid

From before the founding, the โ€œfundamental maxims of a free government [have] seem[ed] to require, that the rights of personal liberty and private property should be held sacred.โ€ The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment exists to protect those sacred rights from unfettered state appropriation by requiring: first, that any taking of private property be…

Read More about SCOTUS has chance to clarify the muddy waters of takings jurisprudence in Cedar Point v. Hassid
Supreme Court should protect citizensโ€™ rights to freely access U.S. waters

When Jim and Cliff Courtney sought to offer private boat transportation so customers could conveniently access their businesses โ€” including Stehekin Valley Ranch, with cabins and a lodge house in the Lake Chelan National Recreation Area โ€” the state of Washington denied their right to do so unless the Courtneys could prove the existing ferry…

Read More about Supreme Court should protect citizensโ€™ rights to freely access U.S. waters