The Committee is considering a proposed amendment to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (“FRAP”) Rule 29, which would make it more difficult for interested parties to file amicus briefs. In our comments, signed by 26 non-profit organizations, we argue that federal judges and the federal rules are not above the Constitution, and the proposed rules would violate amici’s First Amendment rights
Texas v. ATF — Temporary Restraining Order Issued
Last night, on the eve of the effective date of the ATF’s final rule “Definition of ‘Engaged in the Business’ as a Dealer in Firearms,” the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a temporary restraining order until June 2 against the enforcement of the rule against Texas, Jeffery Tormey, Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, Tennessee Firearms Association,
Moyle v. United States — Amicus Brief
Today, our firm file an amicus brief in support of Idaho’s law protecting the life of the unborn after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs in 2022 which reversed Roe v. Wade. The federal government sued Idaho, asserting that the federal Emergency Medical Treatment
Garland v. Cargill — Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed our fifth amicus brief opposing the ATF’s Rule banning bumpstocks — and our third amicus brief in this case. Our amicus brief argued that the bumpstock rule was politically motivated and was not based on a better interpretation of the statutes relating to machineguns. We also explained how the technical mechanisms of a semi-automatic rifle operates, both with and
Morehouse v. ATF — Petition for Rehearing En Banc
Today, our firm, with Stephen Stamboulieh, filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc — joined by 17 States — in the Eight Circuit, in the challenge to the Biden Administration’s ATF rulemaking on frames and receivers.
Loper Bright v. Raimondo — Merits Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in a case requesting the Supreme Court to overturn its Chevron doctrine, a judicially created rule to defer to executive branch agency interpretations of statutes instead of the courts actually interpreting the statutes. Our amicus brief described the confusion caused by Chevron deference, both in the D.C. Circuit in this case and as demonstrated in the various
Guedes v. ATF — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a petition for certiorari challenging the ATF’s reclassification of bumpstocks as machineguns. Our amicus brief explained that the bumpstock ban was a reversal of position for the ATF, and was not based on new analysis, but rather at the direction of the President. Furthermore, the D.C. Circuit’s opinion below was based on marketing
Comments to Department of Education — Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Athletics Rulemaking
Today, we filed comments on behalf of America’s Future, Public Advocate of the United States, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund in response to a Department of Education notice of proposed rulemaking on “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance: Sex-Related Eligibility Criteria for Male and Female Athletic
Biden v. Nebraska — Merits Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in Biden v. Nebraska, a case challenging Biden’s student loan forgiveness vote buying scheme. Our brief, filed on behalf of Citizens United, Citizens United Foundation, and The Presidential Coalition, LLC, explained that the Framers of the Constitution structured the national government with a separation of powers
Tennessee v. Department of Education — Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge brought by Tennessee and several other states against the Biden Administration’s guidance documents dictating how government funded schools must treat homosexuals and transgender students issued by the Department of Education. These rules are far reaching, including boys showering with girls and competing in girls’ sports,
Morehouse v. ATF — Appellants’ Reply Brief
Today, our firm filed the Reply Brief of the Private Appellants in the appeal of the denial of a preliminary injunction against the Biden Administration’s ATF rulemaking on frames and receivers in the Eighth Circuit.
Morehouse v. ATF — Appellants’ Opening Brief
Today, our firm filed in the Eight Circuit the Opening Brief of the Private Appellants in the challenge to the Biden Administration’s ATF rulemaking on frames and receivers challenging the denial of a preliminary injunction by the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota.
United States v. Texas — Merits Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court, in support of Texas and Louisiana and their challenge to the Biden Administration’s written policy not to enforce certain immigration laws. Our amicus brief argued that the States have standing to challenge the unlawful federal actions, both under the doctrine of “special solicitude” standing and parens patriae standing.
Comments to Department of Education — Title IX Rulemaking
Today, we filed comments on behalf of America’s Future in response to a Department of Education notice of proposed rulemaking on “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.” Our comments oppose the regulatory redefinition of “sex” as used by Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972.
Cargill v. Garland — Supplemental Amicus Brief on Rehearing En Banc
Today, our firm file a supplemental amicus brief for the Fifth Circuit’s rehearing en banc of a challenge to the ATF’s bump stock rule. (We previously file an amicus brief in support of the petition for rehearing en banc.) Our brief argued that the bump stock rule was politically motivated and that bump
Cargill v. Garland — Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a petition for rehearing en banc in a case challenging the bump stock ban. Our brief explained that bump stocks do not convert a semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun, and that only Congress has the power to amend the text of statutes. Finally, we explained that the district court’s and the court of appeals panel’s conclusions contradicted
NFIB v. OSHA — Amicus Supporting Stay of Vaccine Mandate
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support applications of stay of the OSHA Vaccine Mandate and a petition for certiorari before judgment. Numerous parties sought court review and a stay of the OSHA Vaccine Mandate after it was issued on November 5, 2021. After the Sixth Circuit allowed the mandate to take effect, requests for stay were sought in the Supreme Court as well as petitions for
Article: “Full Sixth Circuit takes up legality of bump stocks”
Courthouse News Service has this article on the Sixth Circuit’s en banc oral argument in the bump stocks case.
Rob Olson Presents Oral Argument before En Banc Sixth Circuit in Bumpstock Case
Today, Rob Olson presented oral argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit sitting en banc in our continuing litigation against ATF’s bump stock regulation issued in December 2018. The Sixth Circuit granted rehearing en banc after a three-judge panel ruled against the bump stock ban earlier this year. Audio of the oral argument is available.
GOA & GOF Comments Opposing ATF Re-Definition of “Frame or Receiver.”
Today we filed comments with the ATF on behalf of our clients Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation. These comments relate to Docket No. ATF 2021R-05: “Definition of ‘Frame or Received’ and Identification of Firearms.” These Comments explain why ATF has no authority to make these changes in the definition of “frame or receiver” set out in 8 U.S.C. Section 921(a)(3).
Gloucester County School Board v. Gavin Grimm
Today we filed our fourth amicus brief in the Gloucester County School Board case, which now has been been in litigation for over five years. This case involves a high school girl who claimed that her high school violated Title IX by not allowing her to use the boys’ bathroom because she “identifies” as a boy. By a vote of 2-1, the Fourth Circuit panel found a violation. Our brief urges the U.S. Supreme Court to review that decision, explains why the School Board made the right choice, and shows why Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause were not violated.
GOA Letter to Director of National Intelligence & Director of FBI re French Involvement in U.S. Elections
Today we sent a letter, transmitting copies of our October 6, 2020 complaint and exhibits that had been filed with the Federal Election Commission, to DNI Director John Ratcliffe and FBI Director Christopher Wray. This submission was made pursuant to a request of Director Wray made at a Press Conference seeking information about foreign intervention in federal elections on October 21, 2020.
GOA & John Crump — FEC Complaint About Facebook
Today we filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission detailing violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act committed by Facebook, AFP Fact Check, and possibly Kamala Harris for Vice President. The complaint is based on multiple acts of suppression of information about the anti-gun views of Vice Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris by Facebook, pursuant to decisions made by a French
Brief: San Francisco v. Azar
Today our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge to a series of district court decisions within the Ninth Circuit striking down a recent HHS regulation. The regulation issued by the Trump Administration was designed to protect healthcare workers from being required to performing certain procedures, such as abortions, euthanasia, and sex change surgeries.