This incisive publication provides guidance on writing and understanding amicus briefs, with practical suggestions on all aspects of the amicus practice.
Members of the Supreme Court are supposed to base decisions on the law, but often their choices are better explained by political ideology and party loyalty. Roberts sheds light on this problem by looking at a part of the CourtOCOs life that has never been systematically studied. Most cases feature extra briefs written by third parties known as amici curiae. He examines the rare occasions on which the Court allows these extra groups to participate not just by filing briefs but by appearing before the Court during oral arguments. By tracing how these groups influence the justicesOCO behavior, Roberts presents a strong case that the Court is driven by more than politics."
In the last several decades, there has been an explosion in the number of amici curiae, or friend of the Court, briefs filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. Amici are not formal parties to a lawsuit, but file to help inform the Justices about the wider repercussions of the case before them. Public law scholars have long discussed whether these briefs have an impact on the Justices. This book is the first study that seeks to assess the extent of amici influence. This work examines the role of interest groups in the creation and interpretation of the right to privacy, a highly controversial right that derived almost entirely from case law. It looks at amici participation in abortion, aid in dying, family relationships, and anti-sodomy cases. This volume tracks the influence of amici arguments and data on the Justices' handling of these cases.