That's the title of commentary in the current National Law Journal of "friend of the court" briefs. It's written by appellate specialist Aaron Bayer. LINK
Amicus curiae briefs have become a prominent feature of virtually every U.S. Supreme Court case and the subject of considerable scholarly attention. The rules, trends and practices concerning amicus briefs in the federal circuits are more varied and controversial.
• U.S. Supreme Court. Supreme Court Rule 37 provides that an amicus brief that does not "bring[] to the attention of the Court relevant matter not already brought to its attention by the parties . . . burdens the Court, and its filing is not favored." In reality, however, the court "allow[s] essentially unlimited amicus participation." J. Kearney & T. Merrill, "The Influence of Amicus Curiae Briefs on the Supreme Court," 148 U. Pa. L. Rev. 743, 764 (2000). Indeed, the tide of amicus briefs has steadily risen, increasing by 800% over the past 50 years. Id. at 752. During the October 2005 term, amicus briefs were filed in 96% of the court's cases. R. Lazarus, "Advocacy Matters Before and Within the Supreme Court: Transforming the Court by Transforming the Bar," 96 Geo. L.J. (forthcoming 2008).
Landmark cases, of course, have always drawn large numbers of amicus briefs. Many of these add little to the court's deliberations, but the University of Michigan admissions lawsuits, Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003), and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003), demonstrated how influential amicus briefs can be. More than 90 amicus briefs were filed, and many of them, including one joined by more than 80 major corporations, made it clear to the court that Justice Lewis Powell's approach to affirmative action in Bakke had become an accepted part of how important institutions in American society operated. See J. Alger & M. Krislov, "You've Got to Have Friends: Lessons Learned from the Role of Amici in the University of Michigan Cases," 30 J.C. & U.L. 503 (2004).
Comments