Today, David Hardy of Tucson, Arizona, filed an amicus brief, that our firm prepared with him, in support of Kari Lake’s Petition for Review in the Arizona Supreme Court. Our amicus brief argued that the Lake only needed to prove her case by a preponderance of the evidence, not by the clear and convincing standard applied by the courts below. Furthermore,
Wade v. Regents of the University of Michigan — Court of Appeals Amicus Brief
Today, our firm, with Kerry Morgan of Wyandotte, Michigan, filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge to the University of Michigan’s complete ban against possession of firearms by all students. The case is on remand from the Michigan Supreme Court where we previously filed an amicus brief in this case.
Ehlert v. Settle — Reply in Support of Summary Judgment
Today, our firm, with David Browne of Spiro & Browne, PLC, file a Reply in Defendant’s Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment in a challenge to Virginia’s ban on handgun sales to adults under 21. Previously, a temporary injunction was granted pending consideration of the challenge.
Paper: Government-Funded Vouchers Endanger Biblically Faithful Christian Education
Today, Bill Olson and Virginia attorney Rick Boyer released a paper they co-authored on behalf of Exodus Mandate entitled “Government-Funded Vouchers Endanger Biblically Faithful Christian Education.”
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
Antonyuk v. Nigrelli — Answering Brief to State of New York
Today, our firm filed an answering brief in response to the State of New York in its appeal of the injunction of New York’s CCIA.
Antonyuk v. Nigrelli — Answering Brief to Chief Cecile
Today, our firm filed an answering brief in response to Syracuse Police Chief Cecile in his appeal of the injunction of New York’s CCIA.
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,
Antonyuk v. Nigrelli — Statement of Justices Alito and Thomas
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court denied our application to vacate the Second Circuit’s stay of the injunction in Antonyuk v. Nigrelli against New York’s gun law enacted after Bruen which we obtained from a federal
Antonyuk v. Nigrelli — Reply in Support of Application to Vacate Stay
Today, our firm filed a Reply in support of its Emergency Application to Vacate Stay with the Supreme Court, seeking to restore the preliminary injunction of New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act.
Antonyuk v. Nigrelli — Emergency Application to Vacate Stay
Today, our firm filed an Emergency Application with the Supreme Court, seeking an order to vacate the stay issued by the Second Circuit of the preliminary injunction of New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act.
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.
Gonzalez v. Google — Merits Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in Gonzalez v. Google, a case that the Supreme Court has granted review in to consider the scope of immunity granted to technology companies under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 was enacted in the nascent days of the Internet revolution to prevent liability from third-party behavior from crippling innovation in Internet technologies.
Crawford v. Pennsylvania — Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of Pennsylvania’s firearms preemption statutes which establishes that Pennsylvania municipalities do not have the authority to enact local gun laws. We previously filed an amicus brief in this case when it was before the Commonwealth Court. Gilbert Ambler of Ambler Law Offices was co-counsel on the amicus brief.
Antonyuk v. Hochul — Preliminary Injunction
Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York issued a Preliminary Injunction, enjoining New York from enforcing certain provisions of its new Concealed Carry Improvement Act.
Ward v. Thompson — Amicus Supporting Stay of Jan 6 Committee Subpoena
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.
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.
Klein v. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari
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
Antonyuk v. Hochul — Temporary Restraining Order
This morning, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York issued a Temporary Restraining Order. The court temporarily restrained New York from enforcing certain provisions of its new Concealed Carry Improvement Act pending a decision on the motion for preliminary injunction.
Rhode v. Bonta — Supplemental Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed a supplemental amicus brief addressing the effect of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen on the Rhode case. Our firm previously filed an amicus brief in support of Rhode in the Ninth Circuit on August 7, 2020.
Stickley v. Winchester — Preliminary Injunction
Today, the Circuit Court for Winchester City issue a preliminary injunction against portions of Winchester’s ban on carrying firearms in certain areas of the city.
Eagle Forum of Alabama — Amicus in support of motion to quash
Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a motion to quash filed by Eagle Forum of Alabama opposing a subpoena by the federal government. The subpoena demands confidential information from a nonprofit advocacy organization relating to a law passed by Alabama which bans certain medical procedures harmful to minors.
Yukutake v. Hawaii — Supplemental Amicus Brief
Today, our firm filed a supplemental amicus brief addressing the effect of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen on the Yukutake case. Our firm previously filed an amicus brief in support of Yukutake in the Ninth Circuit on May 2, 2022.
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.