Courts Commons^™

First Amendment Forum Classification: Special Use Permits, Limited Public Forums, And The “Heckler’S Veto”, Elizabeth Price Foley

University of Miami Law Review

Pride Month is an important event in many communities because it celebrates and enhances the visibility of the LGBTQ+ community. Pridefest events occurring during Pride Month are well-attended but often mired by threats of violence. Such threats are often targeted at Pridefest drag shows, which exhibit gender-bending performances by drag queens and drag kings of one biological sex, who wear extravagant costumes that exaggerate gender stereotypes of the opposite biological sex. In Naples Pride, Inc. v. City of Naples, the Eleventh Circuit addressed whether a government may impose conditions on such drag shows when threats have been levied against …

Brief Of First Amendment Scholars As Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioner, Joseph M. Terry, Stephen J. Fuzesi, James N. Sasso, Langston E. Ward, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 25-927
Richard Lowery v. Lillian Mills

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The suppression of constitutionally protected speech violates the First Amendment. A speaker need not be punished to be able to state a cause of action if the government has suppressed or threatens to suppress his or her speech through other means. This Court, across decades, and in a range of contexts, repeatedly has reaffirmed that principle. It has done so in cases affirming that a party may challenge a criminal statute …

Standing In The Shadows: Member Anonymity In Associational Standing Cases, Mitchell Brost

Pepperdine Law Review

Associational standing serves several benefits for plaintiff members: associations often have expertise in a certain field that guides the representation of their members, they have greater resources that allow them to bring lawsuits in the first place, and they can serve as the public face of the lawsuit to shield the plaintiff member from serious retaliation that may result from bringing the claim. But due to some imprecise language in Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in Summers v. Earth Island Institute, circuit courts are divided over whether associational members can remain anonymous at all. Thus, individuals who have legitimate legal claims, …

Brief Of Notre Dame Education Law Project, Notre Dame Program On Church, State & Society, And Lindsay And Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Richard W. Garnett, Nicole Stelle Garnett, John A. Meiser

Court Briefs

No. 25-802
Foothills Christian Ministries v. Kim Johnson

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The First Amendment guarantees religious institutions the power to conduct their internal affairs. Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey- Berru, 591 U.S. 732, 746 (2020). See also Cath. Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Lab. & Indus. Review Comm'n, 605 U.S. 238, 249 (2025); id. at 255 (Thomas, J., concurring). This principle of self-governance, known as the church autonomy doctrine, is an essential feature of the Constitution’s …

Let Them Hear It: Peaceful Protests Near The Homes Of Supreme Court Justices, Srikanth Reddy

Lewis & Clark Law Review

All of us—not just attorneys and politicians—need to be more critical and skeptical of the Supreme Court. Criticism by ordinary people is good and appropriate, even if it hurts the Justices’ feelings. That includes public protests. When a case matters enough to them, members of the public can and should criticize the Court and its Justices, including by peacefully gathering and protesting near a Justice’s home, or when a Justice appears out in the world.

Brief Of The Notre Dame Education Law Project, Islam And Religious Freedom Action Team, Jewish Coalition For Religious Liberty, And Manhattan Institute As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, John A. Meiser, Meredith Holland Kessler, Domenic Canonico

Court Briefs

No. 25-581
St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Lisa Roy

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

Three times in the last eight years, this Court has struck down efforts to exclude religious institutions from otherwise available funding programs. Each time, opponents of the Court’s decisions have sought to riddle them with holes, requiring the Court to intervene to prevent its rulings—and the First Amendment’s command against religious discrimination—from being so easily evaded. Regrettably, this Court must step in again, as some states, like Colorado, still …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Lindsay And Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellant, John A. Meiser, Meredith Holland Kessler

Court Briefs

No. 25-5641
Roderick E. Theis, II v. InterMountain Education Service District Board of Directors

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon
No. 2:25-cv-00865-HL

From the Introduction

The First Amendment promises religious believers, of all faiths, the right “to participate on equal terms” in public life. Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819, 852–53 (1995) (Thomas, J., concurring). The Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the idea that individuals sacrifice those rights by accepting government employment. See, e.g., Pickering v. Bd. of Educ. of Twp. High Sch. Dist. 205, …

Brief Of Amici Curiae 775 Law Professors In Support Of Plaintiff's Motion For Summary Judgment And Declaratory And Permanent Injunctive Relief, Wilfred U. Codrington Iii, Haiyun Damon-Feng, Rebecca Ingber, Rachel Landy, Jacob Noti-Victor, Alexander A. Reinert, Anthony J. Sebok

Amicus Briefs

Amicus curiae brief submitted by 775 law professors in support of Susman Godfrey LLP's motion for summary judgment and request for declaratory and permanent injunctive relief in Susman Godfrey LLP v. Executive Office of the President. The brief argues that Executive Order 14263 unlawfully targets a law firm based on its clients, advocacy, and litigation activities, in violation of the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and Sixth Amendment. The amici contend that the order constitutes impermissible viewpoint discrimination, interferes with the right to counsel, and threatens the independence of the legal profession and the rule of law.

The Waiting Is The Hardest Part: The Constitutionality Of Firearm Waiting Periods, F. Lee Francis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

This Article examines the constitutionality of firearm waiting period laws through the lens of the Supreme Court’s evolving Second Amendment jurisprudence. Although such laws are frequently defended as prudent public safety measures, their validity turns not on legislative purpose but on constitutional principle, particularly as framed in District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen.

Under those decisions, the scope of the Second Amendment is determined not by judicial balancing of contemporary interests, but by reference to the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The Article surveys that tradition and finds no …

The Problem Of Biased Precedents, Ronen Avraham, Issachar Rosen-Zvi

Cardozo Law Review

This Article addresses the problem ofbiased precedents, wherein sophisticated repeat players, often corporate and state entities armed with superior resources and a vested interest in shaping the law, manipulate legal proceedings to systematically establish self-advantageous precedents. Specifically, by strategically choosing to litigate cases they anticipate will lead to favorable precedents and settling those expected to produce unfavorable outcomes, these players systematically bias the law over time to their advantage, at the expense of one-shot parties and society at large. The problem of biased precedents challenges the commonly held view about the efficiency and fairness of the legal system and raises …

Brief For Religious Liberty Scholars In Support Of Petitioners, Mark S. Storslee, Kevin T. Baine, Richard S. Cleary Jr., Ian M. Swenson, Joshua A. Hanley, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 24-154
Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. State of Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of Wisconsin

From the Summary of Argument

The First Amendment’s Religion Clauses prohibit the government from answering religious questions or discriminating among religions. At a minimum, that means courts may not dole out protection to some religious groups but not others based on favored or supposedly ‘typical’ religious activities. When administering statutory exemptions whose beneficiaries are religious organizations, courts may not gainsay organizations’ sincere religious beliefs to impose their own view …

Corporate Governance Speech, Sarah C. Haan

Seattle University Law Review

The State has always regulated the intra-firm communications that make corporate governance possible, most commonly by mandating disclosures of information by a corporation to its shareholders. Some such laws are labeled “securities regulation,” but securities regulation is a broad category that extends to speech by actors who are outside the corporate enterprise as well. Also, the conventional securities regulation category does not capture all such laws; other examples, including informationforcing mandates, can be found in state corporate law. This Article uses the term “corporate governance speech” to describe the communications among shareholders, directors, and officers through which corporate governance is …

How The Antidiscrimination Law Of Commercial Transactions Really Works, Helen Norton

Seattle University Law Review

A variety of businesses now cite 303 Creative when seeking First Amendment protection for their refusal to serve certain customers based on those customers’ protected class status. How this litigation will play out remains to be seen. But future courts need not, and should not, repeat the 303 Creative Court’s misunderstanding of how the antidiscrimination law of commercial transactions actually works.

Part I of this Essay explains the Court’s longstanding understanding of the antidiscrimination law of commercial transactions, and then describes the Court’s failure to engage with this precedent in 303 Creative. Part II then identifies the 303 Creative decision’s …

303 Creative, Exclusive Private Enforcement, And Blue-State Revenge, Howard M. Wasserman, Charles W. “Rocky” Rhodes

Journal of Legislation

Red states have made exclusive private enforcement schemes targeting locally unpopular but constitutionally protected conduct a cornerstone of culture-war legal strategy. Laws such the Texas Heartbeat Act (“S.B. 8”) in 2021 and anti-“WOKE” laws forego public enforcement in favor of private enforcement; this forces targeted federal rights-holders to vindicate their rights by raising the law’s constitutional invalidity as a defense to liability rather than through pre-enforcement offensive litigation against the government or government officials responsible for enforcing the law. This threatens rights-holders with a wave of costly and burdensome litigation and liability.

Blue states and liberal scholars and advocates have …

An Analysis Of The Constitutionality Of Florida's 2024 Hb 3: “Online Protections For Minors,” Comparative To Other State Regulations Of The Internet, Evan J. Siegel

Honors Undergraduate Theses

This thesis examines the constitutionality of the Florida House of Representatives’ 2024 priority bill, HB 3: “Online Protections for Minors,” through its ongoing litigation in North Florida. The broad nature of the bill, which is now Florida law, and its burden on accessing constitutionality protected speech and/or expression may not be consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. How the law defines and shapes what material may be accessible to people on the Internet, or the means they would need to use to create a social media account, are questions many other courts have begun …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Manhattan Institute And Notre Dame Education Law Project In Support Of Plaintiffs-Appellants And Reversal, Nicole Stelle Garnett, Ilya Shapiro, Tim Rosenberger

Court Briefs

CASE NO. 24-4291
John Woolard v. John Thurmond

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Case No. 2:23-CV-02305-JAM-JDP

From the Summary of Argument

As part of California’s diverse array of education options, homeschooling parents may choose to enroll their children in independent-study charter schools, which work with parents to develop custom curriculum for their children’s unique educational needs. The plaintiffs did just that here and enrolled their children in Blue Ridge Academy and Visions in Education, both independent-study charter schools. Unfortunately, not all parents are able to avail themselves of this opportunity because …

Defendant St. Isidore Of Seville Catholic Virtual School's Reply Brief In Support Of Motion To Dismiss, Michael H. Mcginley, Steven A. Engel, M. Scott Proctor, John A. Meiser, Michael R. Perri, Socorro Adams Dooley

Court Briefs

No. CV-2023-1857
OKPLAC, Inc. v. Statewide Virtual Charter School Board

From the Introduction

Plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss distills their challenge to the State's approval of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School to its essence: Plaintiffs believe that Oklahoma may never allow a religious organization to operate a charter school because (they contend) any faith-based school would violate the Charter Schools Act and the Oklahoma Constitution. Their other arguments-alleging technical errors in the State's decision to contract with St. Isidore and baseless speculation about how they predict the school might one day violate the law-grow from this …

The Antidote Of Free Speech: Censorship During The Pandemic, Christopher Keleher

Catholic University Law Review

Free speech in America stands at a precipice. The nation must decide if the First Amendment protects controversial, unconventional, and unpopular speech, or only that which is mainstream, fashionable, and government-approved. This debate is one of many legal battles brought to the fore during Covid-19. But the fallout of the free speech question will transcend Covid-19.

During the pandemic, the federal government took unprecedented steps to pressure private entities to push messages it approved and squelch those it did not. The Supreme Court will soon grapple with the issue of censorship during the pandemic. This article examines this litigation, along …

The First Amendment To The Constitution, Associational Freedom, And The Future Of The Country: Alabama’S Direct Attack On The Existence Of The Naacp, Helen J. Knowles-Gardner

Seattle University Law Review

Sixty years ago, on Wednesday, April 8, 1964, Professor Harry Kalven, Jr., gave the second of three lectures at The Ohio State University College of Law Forum. These lectures were published two years later in a book entitled The Negro & the 1st Amendment. In the second lecture, Kalven distinguished between direct and indirect threats to the associational freedom of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Kalven categorized the 1958 decision in NAACP v. Alabama ex rel. Patterson as an indirect effort to control the NAACP.

With the benefit of material obtained from numerous archival sources, …

Professional Norms At A Crossroads: Farhane And Its Implications For Legal Counsel, Hayley Sandoval

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

This Note examines the right to effective assistance of counsel during guilty pleas through the lens of the pending Second Circuit case Farhane v. United States. This case will have significant implications for the right to effective legal representation, particularly in terms of defense attorneys’ duty to warn clients of the potential risk of denaturalization as a consequence of pleading guilty. In May 2024, the court reheard Farhane en banc and will issue a decision later this year. If this opinion aligns with the court’s initial decision, it will severely limit the rights of all defendants in criminal proceedings in …

Defendant St. Isidore Of Seville Catholic Virtual School's Reply Brief In Support Of Motion To Dismiss, Michael H. Mcginley, Steven A. Engel, M. Scott Proctor, John A. Meiser, Michael R. Perri, Socorro Adams Dooley

Court Briefs

No. CV-2023-1857
OKPLAC, Inc. v. Statewide Virtual Charter School Board

From the Introduction

Plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss distills their challenge to the State's approval of St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School ("St. Isidore") to its essence: Plaintiffs believe that the State of Oklahoma may never allow a religious organization to operate a charter school because (they contend) any faith-based school would violate the Charter Schools Act and the Oklahoma Constitution. They purport to raise other, purely technical errors in the Board's decision to partner with St. Isidore; they baselessly speculate about ways in which they predict …

Intervenor St. Isidore Of Seville Catholic Virtual School's Brief In Response To Petitioner's Application And Petition, Michael H. Mcginley, Steven A. Engel, M. Scott Proctor, John A. Meiser, Michael R. Perri, Socorro Adams Dooley

Court Briefs

No. MA-121694
Gentner Drummond v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board

From the Arguments and Authorities

The Petition fails on the merits. Nothing in the Oklahoma Constitution prohibits the State from contracting with a religious school to provide new educational opportunities. And any state law purporting to do so would violate ORFA and the First Amendment.

St. Isidore Of Seville Catholic Virtual School's Motion To Intervene, Michael H. Mcginley, Steven A. Engel, M. Scott Proctor, John A. Meiser, Michael R. Perri, Socorro Adams Dooley

Court Briefs

No. 121694
Gentner Drummond v. Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board

From the Argument and Authority

This Motion to Intervene is both timely and amply supported. Courts assess the timeliness of a motion to intervene "in light of all the circumstances," including "the length of time since the movant knew of its interests in the case; prejudice to the existing parties; prejudice to the movant; and the existence of any unusual circumstances." Tulsa Indus. Auth. v. City of Tulsa, 2011 OK 57, ¶ 31, 270 P.3d 113, 128 (citation omitted) (looking to federal case law for guidance). Courts have …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Eugene Volokh, Richard W. Garnett, & Michael Stokes Paulsen In Support Of Petitioner, Brian D. Schmalzbach, Richard W. Garnett

Court Briefs

No. 23-74
Debra A. Vitagliano v. County of Westchester, New York

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

Even many steadfast supporters of abortion rights believed that the Court erroneously applied the First Amendment in Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703 (2000). As put bluntly by leading liberal scholar Professor Laurence Tribe, Hill was among the candidates for “most blatantly erroneous” decisions of the 1999 Term. Tribe added that the case was “slam- dunk simple” yet the Court got it “slam-dunk wrong.”

Pro-choice …

Brief Of Professor Derek T. Muller As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Petition For Certiorari, Michael Francisco, Michael Brody, Derek T. Muller

Court Briefs

No. 22-1033
Eugene Mazo v. New Jersey Secretary of State

On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

This Court has expressly held that the Anderson-Burdick balancing test for evaluating certain kinds of election laws does not extend to cases of pure political speech. McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334, 344 (1995). Laws restricting political speech are subject to strict scrutiny. Nevertheless, lower courts—including the Third Circuit in this case— continue to defy this Court’s guidance.

This case presents an important opportunity to …

Appellant's Opening Brief, Zack Greenamyre, W. Gerald Weber, John A. Meiser, Meredith Holland Kessler

Court Briefs

No. 23-10332
Rev. Stephen Jarrard v. Sheriff of Polk County

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia No. 4:20-cv-00002-MLB

From the Summary of the Argument

This is an unusual appeal. Sheriff Johnny Moats and Chief Jailer Al Sharp all but admitted that they retaliated against Jarrard and barred him from Polk County Jail’s volunteer ministry program because they disagree with his religious belief that baptism is required for salvation. Indeed, Moats told Jarrard in writing that Jarrard’s beliefs are “contrary to the teaching of the Bible” and that he would not be allowed to …

Brief Of Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Clinic As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, John A. Meiser, Meredith Holland Kessler

Court Briefs

No. 22-741
Faith Bible Chapel International v. Gregory Tucker

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The First Amendment demands that courts refrain from intruding into disputes over a religious organization’s selection of important leaders. The ministerial exception enforces that demand. And thus, nearly every court to consider the issue has agreed: the ministerial exception promises something akin to an immunity from suit, which must be resolved early in litigation to be effective.

Brief Amicus Curiae Of The Becket Fund For Religious Liberty, John A. Meiser, Francesca Matozzo

Court Briefs

No. 22-1876
Mohamed Solah Mohamed A Emad v. Dodge County

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Honorable Lynn Adelman (19-cv-0598)

From the Summary of Argument

Cases concerning the expression of constitutional rights in prison settings often pose difficult questions regarding the appropriate balance between the government’s penological interests and the prisoner’s fundamental freedoms. This case does not. Mohamed Salah Ahmed Emad did not ask the Dodge County Detention Facility (nor does he ask this Court) to locate the appropriate degree to which a prison must accommodate a novel or historically unusual religious exercise. …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Initiative, Megan M. Wold, John A. Meiser

Court Briefs

No. 22-cv-000067
Columbus City School District v. State of Ohio

Judge Jaiza N. Page

From the Summary of Argument

Under Count 4 of their complaint, the plaintiffs ask this Court to do something that it unquestionably may not: invalidate Ohio's longstanding EdChoice Scholarship Program on the theory that it violates the "no-funding" provision of Article VI, § 2 of the Ohio Constitution, which bars any "religious or other sect" from receiving "any part of the school funds of this state." See Compl. ¶¶ 142-52. Under both state and federal law, this Court must dismiss that claim.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Catholic Medical Association And Coptic Medical Association Of North America In Support Of Appellees, Eric N. Kniffin, John A. Meiser, Francesca M. Genova

Court Briefs

No. 2021CA1855
Barbara Morris v. Centura Health Corporation

Appeal from: Colorado District Court, Arapahoe County Case No. 2019CV31980 (Hon. Peter Frederick Michaelson)

From the Summary of Argument

At its core, this case concerns a religious hospital’s right to provide care in accordance with its faith commitments. Centura Health is a Christian healthcare system that is composed of Catholic and Seventh-day Adventist hospitals, including St. Anthony Hospital, the Catholic Hospital for which Dr. Morris worked. In service of their religious mission, Centura Health and St. Anthony Hospital (collectively, “Centura”) require their doctors to abide by the Ethical and Religious Directives for …