Litigation Commons^™

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights In Support Of Respondents: St. Mary Catholic Parish V. Roy, Catherine Smith, Tanya Washington, Robin Walker Sterling, Suzette Malveaux, Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, Sara S. Hildebrand, Abigail L. Fleming, Jeremiah Chin

Scholarly Articles

This Court should consider those most directly impacted by the decision in this case: the intended beneficiaries of Colorado’s Universal Preschool Program (“UPK”), Colorado’s children. To paraphrase Shakespeare, though they be but little, they are constitutional rights-bearers and are thus entitled to be free from state-funded discrimination.

Amici are scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law. Amici draw this Court’s attention to the significant harms children in the LGBT community would bear should Colorado be compelled to allow state-funded religious schools to discriminate against preschoolers. Exempting religious schools from the State’s equal-opportunity and antidiscrimination …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Children's Rights Scholars And Advocates In Support Of Appellants' Opening Brief: Lighthiser V. Trump, Abigail L. Fleming, Douglas A. Ruley, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

For decades, constitutional doctrine has recognized that children possess enforceable constitutional rights and that their developmental, physical, and social differences from adults are important considerations in constitutional analysis. Courts may not impute adult capacities, privileges, or political agency to children when determining whether their rights may be vindicated, leaving them no democratic mechanism to alleviate their injuries.

The district court’s dismissal of the youth plaintiffs’ claims rests on precisely that error. Although the court recognized that the children alleged concrete, severe, and escalating harms caused by the challenged executive actions, it concluded that relief must come from the political branches …

Certiorari Transparency, Alexandra L. Klein, Michael L. Smith

Scholarly Articles

Amid increasing controversy over the Supreme Court’s amassing of power, rejection of precedent, reliance on the shadow docket, and Justices’ undisclosed acceptance of lavish gifts, legal scholars, commentators, and politicians have called for bold and far-reaching reforms to the Court, including term limits for Justices, stripping the Court of jurisdiction in certain cases, and adding Justices to the Court. This Article proposes a more subtle reform to the Court’s proceedings: the Court should make its certiorari de-terminations, in which it decides which cases to take up and review, public. Currently, the Court exercises near-complete discretion over the cases it decides …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights In Support Of Defendants-Appellants: Roy V. Darren Patterson Christian Academy, Catherine Smith, Tanya M. Washington, Robin Walker Sterling, Jeremiah Chin, Sara S. Hildebrand

Scholarly Articles

Amici are scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law. Amici draw this Court’s attention to the harms that four-year-olds in the LGBT community – LGBT children and children with LGBT parents – would bear should state-funded religious schools be granted a license to discriminate against them. An exemption to the Colorado Universal Preschool Program’s equal opportunity requirement would allow plaintiffs to discriminate against these children and raise unfair barriers in their paths to a high-quality education. An exemption would also inflict dignitary, psychological, and familial harms upon an entire class of young people – …

Brief Of Civil Procedure Professors Suzette Malveaux, Alan Trammell, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett, And Doug Rendleman As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents: Trump V. Casa, Trump V. Washington & Trump V. New Jersey, Suzette M. Malveaux, Alan Trammell, Alexi Pfeffer-Gillett, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

Nationwide injunctions are constitutional. Their core feature—courts’ power to render decisions that directly benefit nonparties—is consistent with traditional equitable practices. Accordingly, the Article III “judicial power” comprehends such remedies. Nationwide injunctions also comport with Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement, including constitutional standing.

Broad remedies are sometimes necessary, especially when government actors willfully disregard people’s rights, and the usual tools of aggregate litigation (such as class actions) are not practically available to vindicate those rights. Moreover, courts can readily navigate prudential concerns about nationwide injunctions, from fears of judge shopping to prematurely freezing the law. Courts remain attuned to these concerns, and …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights And Students Engaged In Advancing Texas In Support Of Respondents: Mahmoud V. Taylor, Catherine E. Smith, Tanya Washington, Jeremiah Chin, Sarah Medina Camiscoli, Travis F. Chance

Scholarly Articles

Amici are members of Students Engaged in Advancing Texas and United States legal scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law.

Students Engaged in Advancing Texas is a nonprofit organization founded by young people to develop civic leadership and belonging and represents students of various faiths and identities who have an interest in the outcome of this case.

Amici draw this Court’s attention to the constitutional harms that public school students and LGBTQ+ students and students with LGBTQ+ parents would bear should the Court grant Petitioners’ injunctive relief.

Navahine V. Hawai'i Dept. Of Transportation: The Keiki Will Lead Us, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

The author analyzes the landmark case Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation, which culminated in the world’s first constitutional climate settlement. Catherine Smith, serving as an expert for the youth plaintiffs, situates the case within Hawaiʻi’s legal tradition of prioritizing children’s rights and intergenerational equity. She explores the evolution of children’s constitutional protections, contrasting Hawaiʻi’s progressive jurisprudence with the dominant adult-centric legal framework on the mainland. She critiques four recurring analytical missteps in U.S. courts that marginalize children’s interests and highlights Hawaiʻi’s public trust doctrine and cultural values, such as the Aloha Spirit, as models for addressing climate-related harms. …

Doug Laycock And Creativity In Restitution—The Henrietta Lacks Litigation As A Test Case, Doug Rendleman, Caprice L. Roberts

Scholarly Articles

This Article explores the Henrietta Lacks litigation as a test case for Professor Laycock's writings and theories on the law of unjust enrichment and restitution remedies. A series of modern lawsuits brought by the Lacks Estate allege that defendant companies continue to make unjust profits with knowledge of the unsavory provenance of the Henrietta Lacks immortal cell line. The only count in the complaints is unjust enrichment. The core remedy is restitutionary disgorgement of unjust gains. The authors connect the novel nature of the lawsuits to foundational restitution principles. Professor Laycock's scholarly articles, books, and law reform projects bring deeper …

Leveling The Playing Field For Racial Justice In The Civil Litigation System, Suzette M. Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

Under the weight of the #MeToo movement and severe public pressure, Congress stopped this unseemly practice for a subset of Americans—those challenging sexual assault and harassment. The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFASASHA), passed in 2022, gives these victims a choice of whether to challenge sexual misconduct in court or in arbitration. Such ubiquitous take-it-or-leave-it contracts are now unenforceable, giving this narrow swath of the population the power to decide for themselves how to challenge such outrageous wrongdoing. In Expanding the Ban on Forced Arbitration, Michael Z. Green argues that race discrimination claims should …

Amended Expert Disclosure Report: Navahine V. Dept. Of Transportation, State Of Hawai’I, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

From a historical and sociological legal perspective, children in America, including in Hawai'i, require extraordinary legal protection from the harm of climate change and the government actions causing them harm. Hawai'i has a long history and tradition of leading the way on broadening rights and protections under state law, particularly for children. The principles of intergenerational justice and equity at the heart of the public trust doctrine in Hawai'i similarly require that courts accord special attention and protection for children.

On June 20, 2024, the youth-powered Navahine case settled, resulting in the first constitutional climate settlement of its kind in …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars For The Advancement Of Children’S Constitutional Rights In Support Of Defendants-Appellees: St. Mary Catholic Parish V. Roy, Lauren Fontana, Catherine Smith, Tanya M. Washington, Robin Walker Sterling, Suzette Malveaux, Jeremiah Chin, Sara S. Hildebrand

Scholarly Articles

Amici are scholars of children and the law, education law, family law, and anti-discrimination law. Amici draw this Court’s attention to the harms that four-year-olds in the LGBT community – LGBT children and children with LGBT parents – would bear should state-funded religious schools be granted a license to discriminate against them. An exemption to Colorado’s Universal Preschool Program’s equal-opportunity requirement would allow plaintiffs to discriminate against these children and plant unfair barriers in their paths to a high-quality education and inflict dignitary, psychological, and familial harms upon an entire class of young people solely because of their or their …

Amicus Brief Of Children’S Rights Legal Scholars And Advocates As Amici Curiae In Support Of Neither Party: Trump V. Anderson, Catherine Smith, Jeremiah Chin, Philip L. Gregory, Mathew W. Dos Santos, Julia A. Olson

Scholarly Articles

Amici write, not to urge a particular merits outcome to the questions presented, but to advocate for a judicial review process that (1) is true to constitutional text and this Court’s precedent, (2) accounts for non-voting children and future generations who fall within the protections of the counter-majoritarian provisions of the Constitution, and (3) embraces the perpetuity principle over the political question doctrine.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Corporate And Securities Law Experts: Central Maine Power Company V. Maine Commission On Government Ethics And Election Practices, Sarah C. Haan

Scholarly Articles

Amici submit this brief to share expertise on corporate governance and securities laws and practices that relate directly to the lower court’s narrow-tailoring analysis of the Maine statute at the center of this case. While all participating amici may not agree with every statement in the brief, all amici agree that the Act’s 5% equity ownership threshold is not arbitrary and that ownership of 5% or more of a U.S. entity’s equity by a foreign government or a foreign-government-influenced entity presents a foreign influence on the U.S. entity’s governance and decision-making.

Declaration Of Catherine Smith: Navahine V. Dept. Of Transportation, State Of Hawai’I, Catherine Smith

Scholarly Articles

I submit this expert declaration in support of the children’s motion to maintain their September 2023 trial date so they can have their urgent constitutional rights case involving a life-sustaining climate system accorded the legal prioritization it deserves. Each day that passes without redress not only means an infringement on children’s rights but also impacts their health, safety, well-being, and the cultural lifeways and traditions of Native Hawaiian children. These harms are cumulative and compounding for the duration of the plaintiffs’ childhoods as they mature into adults. And many of the plaintiffs’ climate change-induced injuries are irreversible.

Brief Of First Amendment And Securities Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent: National Center For Public Policy Research V. Securities And Exchange Commission, Sarah C. Haan

Scholarly Articles

Amici are law professors with significant expertise in corporate and securities law, and constitutional law, particularly regarding the First Amendment. They have published extensive analyses about the Shareholder Proposal Rule, shareholder voting, corporate democracy, First Amendment “coverage,” the constitutionality of mandatory disclosures, and various related issues. Amici thus have particular expertise in the First Amendment issues raised by the parties in this case.

Amici submit this brief to respond to Intervenor National Association of Manufacturers’ extreme argument that Rule 14a-8 violates the First Amendment. This position ignores—and NAM repeatedly overlooks—the vital function of proxy solicitation in modern corporate governance and …

Brief Of Law And Business Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents: Macquarie Infrastructure Group V. Moab Partners, L.P., Sarah C. Haan

Scholarly Articles

Amici are scholars at American law schools whose research and teaching focus on federal securities regulation and the governance of public corporations. Three of the authors appearing as counsel on this brief have together submitted to this Court briefs on prior occasions as amici in cases arising under the federal securities laws on behalf of law and business faculty.2 All of us have written and/or taught extensively about the SEC’s system of disclosure and our experience includes service in positions that allowed for the participation in the evolution of the system of disclosure developed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. …

Amicus Curiae Brief Of Law Professor Suzette Malveaux In Support Of Plaintiff’S Opposition To Defendant Ultragenyx’S Motion To Dismiss: Lacks V. Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical, Inc., Suzette Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

Plaintiff alleges that Ultragenyx was conferred the benefit of Henrietta Lacks’s cell line, that Ultragenyx knew of this benefit, and that Ultragenyx unfairly retained the benefit without providing payment to the Lacks family. Moreover, Plaintiff contends that this wrongful conduct has been going on for years, within the three-year limitations period and beforehand. Thus, on the face of the complaint, Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment claims would be viable. Alternatively, Plaintiff may proceed on a theory that an unjust enrichment claim does not ripen until an accumulation of wrongful acts has occurred, which pushes accrual within the limitations period.

Amicus Curiae Brief Of Law Professor Suzette Malveaux In Support Of Plaintiff The Estate Of Henrietta Lacks’S Opposition To Defendant’S Motion To Dismiss Second Amended Complaint: Estate Of Henrietta Lacks V. Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Suzette Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

Plaintiff alleges that Thermo Fisher was conferred the benefit of Henrietta Lacks’s cell line, that Thermo Fisher knew of this benefit, and that Thermo Fisher unfairly retained the benefit without providing payment to the Lacks family. Moreover, Plaintiff contends that this wrongful conduct has been going on for years, within the three-year limitations period and beforehand. Thus, on the face of the complaint, Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment claims would be viable. Alternatively, Plaintiff may proceed on a theory that an unjust enrichment claim does not ripen until an accumulation of wrongful acts has occurred, which pushes accrual within the limitations period.

Brief Of Professor Brandon Hasbrouck As Amicus Curiae In Support Of Appellant: Bell V. Streeval, Brandon Hasbrouck

Scholarly Articles

The core question raised by this case is whether a federal prisoner serving an unconstitutional sentence can be foreclosed from post-conviction habeas relief by the gatekeeping provisions of § 2255. The Constitution answers that question in the negative through the Suspension Clause. “[F]reedom from unlawful restraint [i]s a fundamental precept of liberty,” and the writ of habeas corpus “a vital instrument to secure that freedom.” Boumediene, 553 U.S. at 739. The importance of the common law writ was such that the Framers specified that it could be suspended only in the most exigent circumstances. U.S. Const. art. I, § …

Memorandum Of Amici Curiae Doug Rendleman & Caprice Roberts In Support Of Plaintiff: Estate Of Henrietta Lacks V. Thermo Fisher Scientific, Doug Rendleman, Caprice Roberts

Scholarly Articles

This brief addresses the law of unjust enrichment and its relationship to restitution has failed to state a valid cause of action for restitution relief. Defendant incorrectly insists that plaintiff must plead a tort to seek restitution remedies as well as Both arguments belie the basic tenets of unjust enrichment law. Simply, plaintiff may seek restitution remedies based either a separate tort nor an allegation of the lack of bona fide purchaser status is required to survive these challenges.

Juries, Democracy, And Petty Crime, John D. King

Scholarly Articles

The right to trial by jury in criminal cases is basic to the design of American criminal justice and to the structure of American government. Guaranteed by Article III of the Constitution, the Sixth Amendment, and every one of the original state constitutions, the criminal jury was seen as critically important not only to the protection of individual rights but also to the architecture of American democracy. The vast majority of criminal prosecutions today, however, are resolved without even the prospect of community review by a jury. Despite the textual clarity of the guarantee, the Supreme Court has long recognized …

Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Defendants-Appellees: Braidwood Management V. Eeoc, Suzette Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

Amici are law professors with expertise in the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Amici have written extensively about class action litigation, including the use of class actions in civil rights cases seeking declaratory or injunctive relief. Together, we share an interest in ensuring that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure continue to be construed so as to ensure the “just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” FED. R. CIV. P. 1.

Brief Of Black Women Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Students For Fair Admissions, Inc. V. President And Fellows Of Harvard College And Univ. Of N.C., Suzette Malveaux

Scholarly Articles

Amici are Black women law scholars who, based on their professional and personal experiences, share a deeply rooted commitment to defending the legality of race-conscious admissions policies in educational institutions across the country. They submit this brief to present their unique and vital perspective on the history, constitutionality, and importance of race-conscious programs like those adopted by Harvard University and the University of North Carolina (“UNC”).

Submission Of Amicus Curiae Observations In The Case Of The Prosecutor V. Dominic Ongwen, Erin Baines, Kamari M. Clarke, Mark A. Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

The important questions laid out by the Appeals Chamber in this case highlight the need for the proper delineation and interplay between mental illness and criminal responsibility under international law. Specifically, this case represents a watershed moment for the Appeals Chamber to set a framework for adjudicating mental illness in the context of collectivized child abuse and trauma. This is especially true for former child soldiers who occupy both a victim and alleged perpetrator status.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Katherine Mims Crocker And Brandon Hasbrouck In Support Of Neither Party With Respect To Defendant's Motion To Dismiss: Dyer V. Smith, Brandon Hasbrouck, Katherine Mims Crocker

Scholarly Articles

This case illustrates how the First Amendment functions as an essential backstop to Fourth Amendment freedoms—and vice versa. As revealed by the national response to the killing of George Floyd and so many similar injustices, the ability to record encounters with government representatives is critical to preserving civil rights, and especially the right to avoid excessive force. The public only “became aware of the circumstances surrounding George Floyd’s death because citizens standing on a sidewalk exercised their First Amendment rights and filmed a police officer kneeling on Floyd’s neck until he died.” Index Newspapers LLC v. U.S. Marshals Serv., …

Brief Amici Curiae On Behalf Of Constitutional Law Professors A.E. Dick Howard, Russell A. Miller, And Carl W. Tobias: Lynchburg Range & Training Llc V. Northam, A.E. Dick Howard, Russell A. Miller, Carl W. Tobias

Scholarly Articles

Through Executive Order No. 53, the Governor of Virginia has acted in a manner consistent with the Constitution of Virginia in temporarily limiting access to indoor, nonessential businesses during the COVID-19 health crisis. Nothing in Article I, § 13 should be read to, nor was intended to, prevent the Governor from taking neutral, commonsense actions to protect the public health in the face of a nationwide pandemic.

The Constitutionality Of Nationwide Injunctions, Alan M. Trammell

Scholarly Articles

Opponents of nationwide injunctions have advanced cogent reasons why courts should be skeptical of this sweeping remedy, but one of the arguments is a red herring: the constitutional objection. This Essay focuses on the narrow question of whether the Article III judicial power prohibits nationwide injunctions. It doesn’t.

This Essay confronts and dispels the two most plausible arguments that nationwide injunctions run afoul of Article III. First, it shows that standing jurisprudence does not actually speak to the scope-of-remedy questions that nationwide injunctions present. Second, it demonstrates that the Article III judicial power is not narrowly defined in terms of …

Preserving The Nationwide National Government Injunction To Stop Illegal Executive Branch Activity, Doug Rendleman

Scholarly Articles

The Trump Administration’s extravagant claims of executive power have focused the federal courts’ attention on separation of powers, judicial review, and equitable jurisdiction to grant broad injunctions that forbid the administration’s violations of the Constitution and federal statutes. Critics question the federal courts’ power to grant broad injunctions that are effective everywhere. These critics maintain, among other things, that the federal courts lack jurisdiction and that broad injunctions improperly affect nonparties and militate against “percolation” of issues in a variety of courts.

This Article examines the critics’ arguments and finds them unconvincing. Accepting the critics’ arguments would rebalance the separation …

Gamesmanship And Criminal Process, John D. King

Scholarly Articles

We first learn formal structures of rules, procedures, and norms of conduct through games and sports. These lessons illuminate and inform human behavior in other contexts, including the adversarial world of criminal litigation. As critiques of the legitimacy and fairness of the criminal justice system increase, the philosophy and jurisprudence of sport offer a comparative legal system to examine criminal litigation. Allegations of gamesmanship—the aggressive and strategic use of rules that violate some sense of decorum or culture yet remain within the formal rules of engagement—cut across both contexts. This Article examines what sports can teach us about gamesmanship in …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae The Washington And Lee University School Of Law Black Lung Clinic In Support Of Petitioners: California V. Texas, Timothy C. Macdonnell

Scholarly Articles

Section 1556 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) makes two major changes to the Black Lung Benefits Act. These changes remove limiting language to make it simpler for disabled miners and their families to establish that they are entitled to federal benefits. First, § 1556(a) reinstates the fifteen-year rebuttable presumption, which presumptively entitles former coal miners to benefits if they have worked over fifteen years underground and have a totally disabling pulmonary disease. The second, § 1556(b), reinstates a continuation of benefits for surviving spouses whose coal-mining spouse was receiving benefits at the time of their death. …