Sheldon Whitehouse Confronts 'Anonymously Funded' SCOTUS Amicus Briefs
The Senate Democrat from Rhode Island, writing to Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Court Clerk Scott Harris, decries "the court's practice of routinely accepting amicus curiae briefs from special interest groups that fail to disclose their donors."
February 05, 2019 at 05:33 PM
4 minute read
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, has launched a campaign to reform what he calls the “fecklessness” of the U.S. Supreme Court's rules requiring the disclosure of who is behind amicus curiae briefs filed with the court.
Last month Whitehouse sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Court Clerk Scott Harris, decrying “the court's practice of routinely accepting amicus curiae briefs from special interest groups that fail to disclose their donors.”
As a result, Whitehouse said, the court has opened the door to the “well-heeled, repeat-player amici who routinely flood the court with anonymously funded briefs.”
Whitehouse offered an example, asserting that in the 2016 case Friedrichs v. California involving union agency fees, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation “not only bankrolled the nonprofit law firm bringing the case, but also donated to 11 different organizations that filed amicus curiae briefs supporting the plaintiffs.”
Whitehouse first raised the issue during a colloquy with then-nominee Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing last September, claiming that “once the nominee's on the court, the same business front groups with ties to the Koch brothers and other funders of Republican political machine file friend of the court, or amicus briefs to signal their wishes to the Roberts Five. Who is really behind those friends is another deep, dark secret.”
The court's Rule 37.6 requires that those who file amicus briefs “shall identify every person other than the amicus curiae, its members or its counsel, who made such a monetary contribution.”
Harris, the Supreme Court clerk, invoked the rule in December to rein in the growing trend of organizations undertaking GoFundMe campaigns to fund amicus briefs by seeking small donations from the public, some of which were anonymous. Whitehouse cited The National Law Journal's article on the subject in his letter to Roberts and Harris.
But in the GoFundMe cases, the donations were explicitly sought to fund the production of amicus briefs. Whitehouse's example of the Friedrichs briefs signals that he is taking on a broader target, namely donors who contribute to organizations in general, not specifically to fund a given amicus brief the organization might file.
“Americans deserve to know who is behind these judicial lobbying efforts,” Whitehouse wrote in his letter, adding that the current situation “presents a threat to the court's reputation as neutral arbiter of laws, which I know you value and strive to protect.”
Whitehouse's letter also included a draft bill Whitehouse plans to introduce. It would require those who file three or more amicus briefs with the Supreme Court and federal appeals courts to register with the court and disclose contributions to amicus-filing organizations. The bill would be called “Assessing Monetary Influence in the Courts of the United States Act of 2019.”
Whitehouse's letter, first reported by Roll Call, was made public as an appendix to an amicus brief he filed January 29 in County of San Mateo, California v. Chevron Corp., a Ninth Circuit case brought by California counties and cities seeking damages and other relief from fossil fuel companies for sea level rise.
The brief targets the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's role in the case, which the senator said reflects “a decades-long campaign of disinformation, obstruction, and political intimidation” on the subject of carbon pollution.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All6th Circuit Judges Spar Over Constitutionality of Ohio’s Ballot Initiative Procedures
Amazon, SpaceX Press Constitutional Challenges to NLRB at 5th Circuit
Will the 9th Circuit Still be Center Stage in Trump Policy Challenges?
11th Circuit Revives Project Veritas' Defamation Lawsuit Against CNN
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250