Resource Library

Topics

Filters

Select a Year Range
Clear Filters

Resource Library

New to the Resource Library?

Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.

How to use the Library

Brief of Drug Policy Alliance as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondent

The brief argues a law prohibiting "unlawful users" of controlled substances from possessing firearms is unconstitutionally vague.

Vague lawsunlawful userfirearm possessioncontrolled substanceseparation of powerscriminalization of drug usemarijuanafelony conviction
(2026)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Seattle Chapter National Lawyers Guild

This brief argues that forcing Ms. Kim to choose between a men's prison general population and solitary confinement violates her human rights. It asserts neither option meets minimum standards for dignified treatment.

solitary confinementhuman rightsprisoner's rightsdignityserious harmpenological goalsinternational lawvulnerable population
(2026)

Proposed Brief of Amici Curiae Drug Policy Alliance et al. in Support of Appellant’s Motion for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeals

This brief argues a father cannot be found negligent for his pregnant partner's drug use. Medical experts oppose punitive actions during pregnancy, citing harm to women, children, and families.

Child neglectsubstance usepregnancyfamily separationmaternal and fetal healthopioid use disorderracial disparitiesfoster care
(2025)

Brief of Amici Curiae New York Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union & Four Medical and Public Health Expertson Substance Use Disorder in Support of Respondent-Appellant Jorge C.

The brief argues a Family Court cannot condition parental rights on reducing methadone use without medical cause. It states terminating parental rights due to medication for opioid use disorder is discriminatory under the ADA.

Parental rightsmethadoneopioid use disorderMOUDFamily CourtdiscriminationAmericans with Disabilities Actsubstance use disordertermination of parental rights
(2025)

Brief of Amici Curiae Social Science Researchers in Opposition to Defendants-Appellants’ Petition for Rehearing En Banc, Community Legal Services

This brief argues that unaccompanied migrant children are highly vulnerable and require legal representation. Eliminating funding for these services would inflict severe, lasting harm, which goes against public interest.

unaccompanied migrant childrendirect representation immigration proceedingschild vulnerabilitytraumalegal representationOffice of Refugee Resettlement
(2025)

Brief of Amici Curiae Dr. Jack L. Turban and Dr. Lisa R. Fortuna in Support of Respondents

The brief argues that conversion efforts harm children, as supported by extensive peer-reviewed literature. Colorado's law appropriately bans these efforts while allowing explorative therapy and protecting religious freedom.

conversion effortsgender identitysexual orientationharmchildrentherapyLGBTQ+mental healthsuicide
(2025)

Brief of the American Psychological Association as Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Appellant

The brief argues that suggestive procedures following an initial failure to identify a defendant contaminate memory. This defeats claims that later in-court identifications are from an independent source.

eyewitnessdefendantlineupmemoryin-court identificationsuggestive exposurescontaminate memoryidentification
(2025)

Brief of Amici Curiae Scholars on the Neurological Effects of Pornography on Adolescents in Support of Respondent

The brief argues adolescent brains are uniquely vulnerable to pornography's harms due to neuroplasticity and underdeveloped prefrontal cortices. It asserts protecting youth from addiction outweighs the industry's free speech rights.

Neuroplasticityadolescent brain developmentpornography addictionchildhood exposureprefrontal cortexyouth vulnerabilitypublic health issuebrain development harmsexually explicit materialscompulsive pornography use
(2024)

Motion of Forty Developmental Science Scholars and Nonprofits for Leave to File Amicus Brief in Support of Appellants; Brief of Amici Curiae

This brief argues that mandatory life without parole sentences for 19- and 20-year-olds are unconstitutional. It claims these individuals share the same incomplete brain development as 18-year-olds, making such sentences disproportionate.

People v. ParksMichigan Constitutionmandatory life without parolemandatory LWOPlate adolescencemitigating characteristics of youthMiller v. AlabamaRoper v. Simmonsdevelopmental neuroscienceGraham v. FloridaMontgomery v. Louisiana
(2024)

Amicus Curiae Brief of the Center for Law, Brain, and Behavior in Support of Appellant Evan McCarrick Jerald

This brief argues a 208-year sentence for a juvenile offender is excessive. It contends adolescent brain development and capacity for change, supported by scientific evidence, warrant different sentencing considerations.

Adolescent developmentNeuroscienceAdolescent decison-makingImpulsivityFuture discountingPeer influenceRisky decision-makingAdolescent brain developmentBrain developmentCriminal behaviorSelf-desistanceMaturationEvidence-based treatment
(2024)

Brief of Amici Curiae American Academy of Pediatric Neuropsychology, ACLU of New Jersey, Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, the Center for Law, Brain and Behavior, Gault Center, Juvenile Law Center, Pacific Juvenile Defender Center, & Sentencing Project

This brief argues that scientific findings show late adolescents (ages 18-20) share characteristics with younger teens, warranting similar protections against extreme sentences.

(2024)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Drug Policy Alliance in Support of Petitioner

This brief argues that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) is unconstitutionally vague. It claims the law fails to define "unlawful user" of controlled substances, creating unclear prohibitions and risking unfair prosecution for firearm possession.

vague lawsunlawful usercannabisdrug use criminalizationfirearm possession
(2024)

Brief of Safe Living Space and Dr. Edie Zusman, MD, FAANS, as Amici Curiae in Support of the Petitioner

The brief argues for clarifying the "ongoing emergency" rule for 911 calls in domestic violence cases, especially when victims have head injuries. It seeks guidance on when victim statements are considered evidence for trial.

Confrontation Clauseongoing emergencydomestic violencetestimonial911 callhead injurystrangulationout-of-court statementsSixth Amendment
(2024)

Brief of Center for Law, Brain and Behavior as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellees-Plaintiffs Joao Neves, Keith Nunes, Pablo Ortega, and Mario Monteiro

This brief argues that Mario's Law should apply to all youth under 22 who have served 20 years, citing scientific evidence that adolescent brains continue to develop, making reliable predictions of future dangerousness impossible.

Mario's Lawparole statutelife-determinant sentencesneuroscientific evidenceEighth Amendmentadolescent developmentcriminal justice systemjuvenile offendersbrain development
(2024)

Brief of Amici Curiae Committee for Public Counsel Services, Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

The brief argues that new scientific understanding of eyewitness memory is evidence warranting a review of past convictions. It explains how mistaken eyewitness testimony can unfairly influence a jury's view of other evidence.

(2024)
12...28