Amicus Curiae Research Articles

Brief for Amicus Curiae Lorianne Updike Toler in Soule v. CT Schools in the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Brief for Amicus Curiae Lorianne Updike Toler in Soule v. CT Schools in the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Morte e vida no debate sobre aborto: uma análise a partir da audiência pública sobre a ADPF 442

Abstract Starting from the premise that the agenda on reproductive rights is home to political disputes in the field of sexuality and reproduction, this article reviews the debate held at the public hearing on the Argument of Noncompliance with a Fundamental Precept (Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental, ADPF) # 442 in August 2018. The lawsuit proposes the decriminalization of abortion induced by the pregnant woman herself or with her consent until the 12th week of gestation. At the hearing convened by the Supreme Court, 50 amicus curiae presentations were held, catalyzing the current arguments raised in the public debate on abortion in Brazil. The content of the public hearing (characters, places, images, audios, texts, and video) is taken as empirical material for this research. Considering the centrality of the defense of life/combating death argument, both in speeches for and against the ADPF, we examine the different frameworks used by political actors on the scene when debating the issue of abortion in terms of a clash between death and life. More than a polysemy, it is a clash that makes explicit hierarchies regarding reproduction and women’s lives.

Brief for Amicus Curiae The Kentucky Commission on Human Rights, Nelson v. Louisville Metro (Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, Nos 22-5884/22-5912)

Brief for Amicus Curiae The Kentucky Commission on Human Rights, Nelson v. Louisville Metro (Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, Nos 22-5884/22-5912)

Brief of the American Civil Rights Project as Amicus Curiae Supporting the Petitioner in Metropolitan School District of Martinsville v. A.C. a Minor Child by his Next Friend, Mother, and Legal Guardian, M.C., (No. 23-393) (cert. stage).

Brief of the American Civil Rights Project as Amicus Curiae Supporting the Petitioner in Metropolitan School District of Martinsville v. A.C. a Minor Child by his Next Friend, Mother, and Legal Guardian, M.C., (No. 23-393) (cert. stage).

Brief of Amicus Curiae Antitrust, Business, and Sports Law Professors in Support for the Petition of Certiorari in Tri-City Valley Cats v. The Office of the Commissioner of Baseball (Sup. Ct. 2023)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Antitrust, Business, and Sports Law Professors in Support for the Petition of Certiorari in Tri-City Valley Cats v. The Office of the Commissioner of Baseball (Sup. Ct. 2023)

Richard Glossip v. State of Oklahoma : Brief Amicus Curiae of Victim Family Members Derek Van Tresse, Donna Van Treese, and Alana Mileto, and the Oklahoma District Attorneys Association in Opposition to the Petition

Richard Glossip v. State of Oklahoma : Brief Amicus Curiae of Victim Family Members Derek Van Tresse, Donna Van Treese, and Alana Mileto, and the Oklahoma District Attorneys Association in Opposition to the Petition

Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, Merits Amicus Curiae Brief Submitted on behalf of the Human Rights Law Centre of the University of Nottingham

Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, Merits Amicus Curiae Brief Submitted on behalf of the Human Rights Law Centre of the University of Nottingham

Brief of Proposed Amicus Curiae United Tenants of Albany and Bleecker Terrace Tenants Association in Support of Defendant-Appellants in Pustere et al., v. The City of Albany

Brief of Proposed Amicus Curiae United Tenants of Albany and Bleecker Terrace Tenants Association in Support of Defendant-Appellants in Pustere et al., v. The City of Albany

Introduction to the Special Section.

Introduction to the Special Section Franklin G. Miller Happy is a female elephant who has been confined at the Bronx Zoo for over 40 years. In 2018 the Nonhuman Rights Project sued the Wildlife Conservation Society, which manages the zoo, seeking habeas corpus for Happy in order to release her to an elephant sanctuary. Numerous amicus curiae briefs were filed in favor and against the petition on behalf of Happy. The case reached the highest court in New York State, which denied the petition of the plaintiff in June 2022. This special section includes views on the case of Happy by David DeGrazia, Martha Nussbaum, and Christine Korsgaard, three distinguished moral philosophers who have made significant contributions to animal ethics. The essays by Martha Nussbaum and Christine Korsgaard are drawn from the amicus briefs that they filed in the legal proceedings, which they agreed could be published here. Professor Nussbaum applies her "capabilities approach" as a foundation for promoting wellbeing and recognizing rights to Happy and to elephants in general. She argues that Happy is a being with a meaningful life and is entitled to be treated with respect and dignity, which is incompatible with her conditions of confinement at the zoo. Professor Korsgaard applies her understanding of the moral philosophy of Immanuel Kant to the case of Happy—a "cognitively sophisticated [End Page 1] animal" which, like human beings, should be treated as an end in herself and not merely as a means to the purposes of human beings. Professor DeGrazia, in an invited essay, analyzes the meanings of "person" and examines the pertinent characteristics of elephants that make them at least "borderline persons," with the moral status of possessing basic rights. While Happy remains confined at the Bronx Zoo, these three incisive contributions challenge readers to reflect on the ethical treatment of nonhuman animals, especially those with complex and rich capacities of intelligence and emotion. [End Page 2] Franklin G. Miller Weill Cornell Medical College, New York Copyright © 2023 Johns Hopkins University Press ...

Brief of Amicus Curiae Crime Survivors for Safety and Justice in Support of Petitioner John Kowalczyk, In Re Kowalczyk

Brief of Amicus Curiae Crime Survivors for Safety and Justice in Support of Petitioner John Kowalczyk, In Re Kowalczyk

The Recent Crisis of the WTO Appellate Body: Is the WTO’s Reform a Solution?

<p><em>At the end of 2019, the international society was surprised by the cessation of the Dispute Settlement Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) since the United States (US) blocked the election of the new judge of the Appellate Body (AB). This study examined the superiority and drawbacks of the implementation and capacity of the WTO dispute settlement body (DSB) to maintain the trading system among the state members. This paper finds that the WTO DSB plays a crucial role in the panel report’s acceptance. WTO also continues to develop and is characterized by a strict interpretation of the WTO treaties. Nevertheless, provisions were criticized, which made their implementation inefficient, such as retaliation, the lack of transparency, the restriction of amicus curiae briefs, the procedure of concession suspension, and the deficiency in the enforcement of the report by the injured party. The crisis that happened to the AB could trigger countries to revise the mistakes in the WTO whole system. This situation presents a chance to resolve issues about the output quality and institutional mandate observance of the WTO tribunals. Overall, the ideal option for member states is to continue incurring the costs of loss, develop a consensus, earn global benefits to keep the trading system running and support the WTO through active participation.</em></p>

The actuary as amicus curiae

The role of an amicus curiae as a party to litigation is closely linked to promoting constitutional values and protecting the public interest. There is no question that interventions by amici curiae have played a critical role in aiding the judiciary in many public interest cases. The Actuarial Society of South Africa is prioritising its focus on advancing issues of public interest and serving a broader spectrum of the populace. However, it has yet to utilise this specific mechanism to manifest this mandate. The Actuarial Society of South Africa can provide a numerical perspective on various rights disputes deriving from the Constitution. In contrast, the courts have asked other professional bodies, such as the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants, to join proceedings. Actuarial bodies, particularly those in the United States of America, are actively involved in public interest matters and occasionally join amicus curiae proceedings. Following an exploration of the use of amici curiae in South African and African courts, this paper seeks to identify a test case where the Actuarial Society of South Africa may join proceedings as a friend of the court. The mechanism and procedure for joining the court as an amicus curiae and the risks and benefits of joining proceedings are examined.

URGENCE AND CHALLENGES OF REGULATION OF AMICUS CURIAE IN THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM

The judicial system in Indonesia is dynamic and adaptive to the development of science and law, not least within the scope of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, one of which relates to the amicus curiae (friends of the judiciary). In practice, amicus curiae are generally presented in cases or trials that get public attention and the livelihoods of many people, such as the environment, land, labor, and so on. Nevertheless, there is no regulation or Supreme Court Regulation on the application of amicus curiae in the trial, but various practices have occurred within the court. This paper will discuss: (a) how the concept of amicus curiae is in the justice system in several countries, (b) the practice and application of amicus curiae in the judiciary in Indonesia, and (c) the opportunity for the Supreme Court to issue regulations or circulars that seek to regulate the implementation of the amicus curiae as part of legal developments in Indonesia. This writing uses a qualitative method with a normative juridical approach. The results of this paper conclude that amicus curiae have become a good practice in the judicial system in Indonesia, especially in public cases, and the Supreme Court has the authority to make arrangements through PERMA as a foundation and procedure guide for all judicial personnel and society in Indonesia.

The Internet Archive and the National Emergency Library: Copyright Law and COVID-19

In the tradition of legal writing about landmark intellectual property cases, this paper provides an in-depth case study and analysis of an important copyright conflict during the COVID-19 crisis. The Internet Archive established the National Emergency Library to provide for access to knowledge for those who were unable to access their usual libraries, schools, and educational institutions. In response, four large publishers have brought a copyright lawsuit against the Internet Archive, alleging both direct copyright infringement, as well as secondary copyright infringement. The Authors Guild has supported this action. Fearful of litigation, the Internet Archive has decided to close the National Emergency Library earlier than it anticipated. The litigation raises a range of issues in respect of copyright infringement, the defence of fair use, library exceptions, digital lending, and intermediary liability. The conflict also raises questions about the operation of the first sale doctrine in the digital era. There are also divided views as to what, if any, remedies are appropriate in the case over the Internet Archive and the National Emergency Library. It is argued that there needs to better mechanisms under copyright law to enable access to knowledge in a public health crisis—such as the coronavirus outbreak. This case study makes a significant contribution to our understanding of the relationship between authors, publishers, and libraries in the digital age. It also provides an insight into copyright litigation—in particular, the role of amicus curiae submissions, and the nature and scope of copyright exceptions. This paper also raises larger considerations about the intersection of copyright law with larger concerns about access to knowledge, competition policy, and public health emergencies.

A critique of the Supreme Court’s pronouncements on international law and the right to housing in Kenya in Mitu-Bell Welfare Society

Kenyan courts have long grappled with questions surrounding the place of international law in the legal landscape particularly after the promulgationof the 2010 Constitution. Moreover, socio-economic realities have created conditions such as poor and inadequate housing for portions of society, a significant number resultantly having to reside in informal settlements all over the country. Unregulated demolitions of these settlements have left thousands of these already precarious slum dwellers homeless and destitute. In light of these issues, the case of Mitu-Bell Welfare Society v Kenya Airports Authority & 2 others; Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Africa (amicus curiae) was expected to bring about clarity on the application of international law to issues such as human rights, as well as provide a definitive interpretation of the right to housing that would help mitigate injustices in this area. This paper analyses the Supreme Court of Kenya’s decision in Mitu-Bell Welfare Society, canvassing how the court addressed the applicability of international law and the interpretation of the right to housing.

Between universalism and cultural relativism The dilemma of consent to female genital mutilation in the Tatu Kamau case

To date, almost 74 years since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (the UDHR), the tensions between universalism and cultural relativism in the field of human rights, whose provenance can be traced back to the debates surrounding the drafting and adoption of the UDHR, still linger on, playing out on the national stage in countries such as Kenya. At its core, universalism argues that all human rights inhere in all individuals without distinction, and that they must stand even when in when in opposition to established cultural practices. In contrast, cultural relativism holds that no particular culture is superior to another, and centers on the need for forbearance and respect towards each culture to avoid imperialist tendencies of imposing beliefs. This paper argues that these binary ideological viewpoints are magnified in the context of female genital mutilation. Through an analysis of the case of Tatu Kamau v Attorney General & 2 others; Equality Now & 9 others (Interested Parties); Katiba Institute & another (amicus curiae) [2021] eKLR, it is proposed that a cultural approach is needed in addition to legal measures in place to combat the practice.

AMICUS CURIAE AS THE DEVELOPMENT OF EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE

Article 184 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code has limitedly determined legal evidence according to the law, however, in the last few years, the Indonesian Court of Justice has emerged Amicus Curiae. In this study, it will be discussed the legal basis for judges to apply the Amicus Curiae as evidence of a crime in positive law in Indonesia today (ius constitutum) then the second issue will discuss the Amicus Curiae as evidence development in the KUHAP in the future come (ius constituendum). The research method used is normative juridical or library research related to normative legal substances, to find the truth based on scientific logic from the normative side by examining library materials or secondary data consisting of primary and secondary legal materials. Amicus Curiae is a legal concept that is not well known in Indonesia which adheres to the Civil Law legal system. The legal concept of Amicus Curiae is indeed only practiced in the traditions of countries that adhere to the common law legal system. The proof using the Amicus Curiae concept has been found in many cases in Indonesia. However, legally the Amicus Curiae has not been regulated in positive law in Indonesia.

Review: Latina Lives, Latina Narratives: Influential Essays by Vicki L. Ruiz, edited by Miroslava Chávez-García

Review: <i>Latina Lives, Latina Narratives: Influential Essays by Vicki L. Ruiz</i>, edited by Miroslava Chávez-García

Uniformization of precedents: for a materialization of the process in Habermasian pluralist communication

This article analyzes the judiciary system’s tendency to unify multiple jurisprudences and eventual conflicts with cultural diversity. The judiciary system’s interpretation of laws is interpreted with skepticism, as they might result in derogation of the legislative prerogatives. Critics have gained strength from the actual procedure code's disposals that made compulsory judiciaries pronounce in state and national levels. The present study investigates how judicial understandings of laws could provide voices to the diversity of cases that might eventually be submitted to the Courts' analyses. The broad participation of the amicus curiae in each biding case along with the full applicability of atypical procedural agreements should be conceived as an indispensable condition to give plain social validity and maximum effectiveness to the judiciary pronunciation, especially whenever regarding the most fundamentals concepts of the democratic archetypes resembling the main ideas forecasted by the second generation of the Frankfurt Philosophical School, among whom Jürgen Habermas is considered as the field’s most influential author. The present study uses a dialect-inductive methodology to confirm the hypothesis that both state and superior Courts must analyze various juridical divergent theses so that the bindings might not lack social effectiveness, especially by using the amicus curiae's opinion thoroughly.

Amicus Curiae Briefs and the Competing Legal Agendas of White Protestants in the United States, 1969–2020

AbstractWe use Supreme Court amicus curiae briefs filed by seven religious groups—four liberal and three conservative—to understand the changing nature of political conflict between American religious groups in the predominantly White Protestant tradition from 1969 to 2020. Religious groups on both sides of the ideological divide have increased the frequency of their amicus filings, and increasingly become involved in issue areas which were once primarily the concern of groups on the other side. These findings suggest that the culture war that redefined party politics in America has also shaped religious activism, including legal activism. We argue that these groups have increased their involvement in a wider range of issues for two reasons: their rivalry for influence over the nation's moral center has become more encompassing and overtly political, and their appreciation for and consciously developed ability to tap into the courts' influence on American politics has grown.