Amicus brief

Ivy League & 12,000+ Alumni Rally to Defend Harvard Against Funding Cuts

Twenty-four universities, including five Ivy League institutions, filed an amicus brief supporting Harvard University in its lawsuit against the Trump administration over threatened funding cuts totaling $2.2 billion. Simultaneously, over 12,000 Harvard alumni submitted a separate brief denouncing the funding freeze as an unlawful attempt to control the university. Both briefs emphasized the interconnectedness of academic research and the detrimental impact of the cuts on American innovation and competitiveness. The universities argued that halting funding to one institution would jeopardize collaborative research projects crucial to national advancement. The alumni brief further condemned the administration’s actions as an infringement on academic freedom and a pretext for political control.

Read More

Retired Judges Condemn Trump DOJ’s Prosecution of Judge

Over 130 former state and federal judges filed an amicus brief supporting Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan’s motion to dismiss charges of impeding government agents. The brief argues that prosecuting Dugan for actions within her judicial discretion constitutes an assault on judicial independence and threatens the ability of judges to perform their duties without fear of retaliation. This prosecution, they contend, sets a dangerous precedent by prioritizing federal interests over state court proceedings and jeopardizes the balance of federalism. The judges’ brief emphasizes the importance of judicial immunity and the potential chilling effect on judicial decision-making.

Read More

50 State AGs Unite to Secure Justice for Veterans Denied GI Benefits

In an unprecedented move, all 50 state attorneys general filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to grant full GI Bill benefits to two veterans wrongly denied them. This bipartisan effort follows a Supreme Court ruling affirming veterans’ entitlement to 48 months of benefits under both the Montgomery and Post-9/11 GI Bills. The attorneys general argue the Department of Veterans Affairs is contradicting this ruling with a restrictive interpretation. The case highlights the importance of upholding the nation’s promise of education benefits to veterans and underscores the rare unity across state political lines on this issue.

Read More