Some of the factual assertions in recent amicus briefs would not pass muster in a high school research paper. But that has not stopped the #SCOTUS from relying on them. Recent opinions have cited “facts” from amicus briefs that were backed up by blog posts, emails or nothing at all. Some “studies” presented in amicus briefs were paid for or conducted by the group that submitted the brief and published only on the Internet. Some studies seem to have been created for the purpose of influencing the Supreme Court. Yet in the #HobbyLobby case, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. pushed back against the recent trend, refusing to consider “an intensely empirical argument” in an amicus brief. “We do not generally entertain arguments that were not raised below and are not advanced in this court by any party,” he wrote.
Posted on: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 17:49:36 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015