Ward v. Thompson — Amicus Supporting Stay of Jan 6 Committee Subpoena

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of an emergency application for stay of a subpoena for phone records issued by the House January 6 Committee. Our brief was filed on behalf of America’s Future, Free Speech Coalition, Free Speech Defense and Education Fund, U.S. Constitutional Rights Legal Defense Fund, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Link Read More

United States v. Texas — Merits Amicus Brief

Jeremiah Morgan Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, Statutory Construction, U. S. Supreme Court

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. Read More

Klein v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of two owners of a specialty cake shop in Oregon. The owners were targeted because they are Christians and were fined by the state of Oregon for declining to design and create a wedding cake to celebrate a same-sex marriage. Our brief argued that Oregon’s public accommodations law defies the jurisdictional limit on government imposed by the Read More

Moore v. Harper — Merits Amicus Brief

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, Election Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, our firm filed an amicus brief for America’s Future in the U.S. Supreme Court which is considering whether state courts may usurp the constitutional role of state legislatures to set the “Times, Places and Manner” for holding Congressional elections under Article I, Sec. 4, cl. 1. Our brief answered that question in the negative, arguing that the U.S. Constitution assigns Read More

Torcivia v. Suffolk County — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, Firearms Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge to a Second Circuit decision which upheld an illegal search and seizure of firearms in his home by police after Petitioner was taken for a mental health examination. The police now assert that the “special needs exception” to the Fourth Amendment permitted the search and seizure.

Our brief urges the Supreme Court to grant Read More

Missouri v. Biden — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, Health Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a petition for certiorari filed by Missouri and nine other states challenging the CMS vaccine mandate for workers healthcare at certain facilities. Our brief argued that the vaccine mandate is not permitted under either the Spending Clause or the Commerce Clause. Our brief also argued that the vaccine mandate impermissible commandeers state employees Read More

303 Creative v. Elenis — Merits Amicus Brief

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, our firm filed an amicus brief on the merits in 303 Creative. We previously filed an amicus brief in support of the petition for certiorari. Our amicus brief argued that the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act empowers militant, homosexual activists to use the legal system to attack and destroy Christian business owners. Read More

Heltzel v. Youngkin — Amicus brief supporting petition for certiorari

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

In Heltzel, a group of plaintiffs are challenging the removal by former Governor Ralph Northam of the Robert E. Lee Monument, which had stood in Richmond for 120 years. The Heltzel plaintiffs are now seeking U.S. Supreme Court review of a decision of the Virginia Supreme Court which sanctioned that removal. Today, our firm filed the only amicus brief in support of the Lee Monument and against Read More

Jewel v. NSA — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

In Jewel, a group of plaintiffs are seeking a federal injunction against the widespread, warrantless surveillance of communications involving Americans by the National Security Agency (NSA). The case has been litigated for over a decade, most recently with the Ninth Circuit denying relief in a dismissive, one-page opinion. The Jewel plaintiffs are now seeking U.S. Supreme Court intervention to Read More

NFIB v. OSHA — Amicus Supporting Stay of Vaccine Mandate

Jeremiah Morgan Administrative Law, Constitutional Law, Health Law, U. S. Supreme Court

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 Read More

303 Creative v. Elenis

Jeremiah Morgan Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today, our firm filed an amicus curiae brief in support of a Petition for Certiorari filed by small business owner who provides website design services.  She would like to begin offering custom wedding websites, but the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (the same law used against Jack Phillips and Masterpiece Read More

FBI v. Fazaga — FISA & State Secrets Privilege

admin Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today our firm filed an amicus brief in support of certain Muslims in Los Angeles who were surveilled electronically and otherwise by the FBI and a confidential informant. The FBI has asserted the state secrets doctrine to seek dismissal of most claims, including a FISA claim under which the district court could conduct an ex parte in camera review of the surveillance to determine if there were Read More

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. — CLDEF Amicus Brief

admin Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today we filed a brief for CLDEF in support of the effort by Mississippi to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) and in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992).  We argued that Supreme Court abortion jurisprudence in no way was based on the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, but rather the personal preferences of the justices.  Our brief exposed three major flaws in Roe:  1. Roe relied on misrepresentations about how common law viewed abortion; 2. Roe made flawed assumptions understating the maternal risk from abortion; and 3. Roe erroneously assumed state anti-abortion laws were not written to defend the life of the preborn. Lastly, we urged the Court to end its historical embrace of eugenics.

Link to brief

Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org. — Intercessors for America Amicus Brief

admin Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today we filed a brief for Intercessors for America in support of the effort by Mississippi to overturn the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) and in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992).  We argued that the Court erred in establishing “viability” as the touchstone for its abortion decisions.  We also explained how Justice Blackmun based his decision on a Pagan foundation.  We cited many Supreme Court sources to demonstrate that the Court increasingly does what it wants to do, regardless of what the Constitution states.  We review how the Court’s jurisprudence in areas such as the Establishment Clause and government schools has established paganism as our nation’s religion.  Lastly, we explain that this Court’s abortion cases have brought bloodguilt upon the land and opened the nation to God’s righteous temporal judgments.

Link to brief

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen — SCOTUS Merits

admin Constitutional Law, Firearms Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today we filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting a challenge to the virtual ban on concealed carry in New York State.   The brief was filed on behalf of Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, and the Heller Foundation.  We critique the Second Circuit case in Kachalsky v County of Westchester, explain how the New York licensing scheme undermines the prefatory Read More

Young v. Hawaii

admin Constitutional Law, Firearms Law, U. S. Supreme Court

We filed our second brief in the Young v. Hawaii challenge to Hawaii’s virtual total ban on carrying firearms in the State of Hawaii. Our earlier brief was filed before the Ninth Circuit en banc. This brief was filed in the U.S .Supreme court in support of Young’s Petition for Certiorari. We urge the Court to overturn the two-step test used in many Second Amendment challenges. We also challenge the “longstanding” ban in Hawaii, most of which occurred during the time Hawaii was governed by a Monarchy. We demonstrate why certiorari should be granted even though New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett is pending before the court. And we trace the numerous criticisms by Justices and Judges as to how the lower courts have treated the Second Amendment since Heller and McDonald.

Link to brief

Gloucester County School Board v. Gavin Grimm

admin Administrative Law, U. S. Supreme Court

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.

Link to brief

AFPF/Thomas More Law Center v. Becerra (Free Speech Coalition amicus brief)

admin Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today we filed an amicus brief in support of the First Amendment rights of California nonprofit organizations, which are currently being required to file a list of their major donors with the California government.  Our brief, filed on behalf of 21 nonprofit organizations, explains why a Constitutional Republic should never require voluntary associations to reveal the identity of their members Read More

AFPF/Thomas More Law Center v. Becerra (Citizens United amicus brief)

admin Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today we filed an amicus brief in support of AFPF’s and Thomas More’s First Amendment challenge to California’s compelled disclosure of information about the major donors of nonprofit organizations.  We explain in our brief why the Ninth Circuit erred in determining that the Supreme Court’s landmark NAACP v. Alabama decision does not apply here.  Second, we Read More

Mai v. United States

admin Constitutional Law, Firearms Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today our firm filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to review a Ninth Circuit decision which allowed a ban on gun possession by a man who had suffered a mental health crisis as a minor, but who had since then been found by the State of Washington not to be a danger to himself or to others.  Nevertheless, as the Ninth Circuit has done in every Second Amendment challenge brought before Read More

Caniglia v. Strom

admin Constitutional Law, Firearms Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge to a First Circuit decision which upheld an illegal search and seizure of firearms by police after a Petitioner husband and his wife had a non-violent, non-threatening argument.  Tired of arguing with his wife, the husband threw down an unloaded handgun and said something like “just shoot me.”  The next day the police showed Read More

Lange v. California

admin Constitutional Law, U. S. Supreme Court

Today we filed an amicus brief opposing warrantless home invasions by police officers in pursuit of fleeing misdemeanor suspects.  Both parties asked the court to reject a categorical approach that would allow such searches, but both favored a case-by-case rule that could allow such searches in some cases. To remain consistent with the text, history and tradition of the Fourth Amendment, we argued in favor of a categorical rule against such warrantless home invasions.

Link to brief