Amicus Briefs

The ACLU Foundation of Northern California routinely files amicus briefs in state and federal cases, providing legal arguments that help expand and protect the rights of Californians. Amicus briefs, or "friend of the court" briefs, are filed by non-parties to offer legal arguments and expertise to assist the court in its decision-making.

People of the State of California v. Gerald Louis Clymer, Jr., Request for Depublication Filed in the California Supreme Court: Sought depublication of appellate decision that improperly and unnecessarily limited the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act’s suppression remedy. (Case No. S288791, Date Filed: Feb. 3, 2025)
In re De'Jhaun Jones, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review concerning whether trial courts may intentionally set unaffordable money bail to achieve detention when they otherwise fail to make the findings required to order detention under Cal. Const. art. 1, sec. 12. (Case No. S288789, Date Filed: Feb. 6, 2025)
Snap, Inc. v. Superior Court of San Diego County (Adrian Pina, et al.), Amicus Brief Filed in California Supreme Court: Our amicus brief argued that the Fourth District’s misinterpretation of the federal Stored Communications Act would seriously undermine privacy in digital communications by enabling the warrantless sharing of these communications. At the same time, our brief urges the high court to take the opportunity in its decision to highlight the tools and protections that are available to Californians to safeguard their fundamental right to privacy, including Article I, Section 1 of the California Constitution and the California Consumer Privacy Act. (Case No. S286267, Date Filed: Feb. 28, 2025)
Topaz Johnson and Ian Henderson v. High Desert State Prison, Amicus Brief Filed in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: This amicus brief explains why requiring indigent prisoners to each pay a filing fee when proceeding jointly in a single action impedes access to justice given the significant costs of incarceration and the financial burden placed on indigent prisoners by filing fees. (Case Nos. 23-15299 & 23-15396, Date Filed: Mar. 24, 2025)
Carlos "Lina" Santiago v. Orange County Superior Court, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review contending that California Penal Code § 302(a), which prohibits “disturbing” and “disquieting” religious meetings, violates the First Amendment. (Case No. S289675, Date Filed: Mar. 25, 2025)
Family Violence Appellate Project v. Superior Courts of California, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Supreme Court: Our amicus brief argues that Government Code section 69957.2, which prohibits electronic recording of most civil proceedings, violates the state constitution’s equal protection guarantee, because it creates an unconstitutional wealth-based classification that burdens the fundamental right to appellate review. (Case No. S288176, Date Filed: Apr. 9, 2025)
R.D. v. Superior Court of Sacramento County, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review concerning whether and which remedies are required when a court finds a violation of the California Racial Justice Act. (Case No. S290023, Date Filed: Apr. 14, 2025)
In re S.R., Amicus Brief Filed in the California Supreme Court: Our amicus brief argued that the Court should recognize that parents have a right to challenge their inclusion on California's Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) after children have been returned to the parent, based on both due process and the constitutional right to privacy. (Case No. S285759, Date Filed: Apr. 25, 2025)
City of Huntington Beach v. Gavin Newsom, Amicus Brief Filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California: Our amicus brief explained why the California SAFETY Act protects students from discrimination and harassment caused by forced “outing” policies. (Case No. 8:24-cv-02017-CBM-JDE, Date Filed: May 9, 2025)
People of the State of California v. Superior Court of Orange County, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District: Our amicus brief supports a challenge to Huntington Beach’s placement of a charter amendment that would require citizens to present a voter identification to vote, focusing on the disparate burdens that voter ID laws place on marginalized communities. (Case No. G065492, Date Filed: May 13, 2025)
Evelyn Davis Alfred v. City of Vallejo, Amicus Brief Filed in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief argues that the district court properly issued a narrowly tailored injunction to protect an unhoused Vallejo resident against the City’s attempts to remove her only available shelter. (Case No. 25-1658, Date Filed: May 29, 2025)

Aurora Regino v. Kelly Staley, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief explains why the Chico School District’s policy directing staff not to disclose a student's transgender or gender non-confirming status to others, including their parents or guardians, complies with the First and Fourteenth Amendments. It also argues that, even strict scrutiny applies, the policy nonetheless is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling purpose to establish a safe and supportive school environment and protect student well-being and privacy. (Case No. 23-16031, Date Filed: Jan. 9, 2024)
Legislature of the State of California v. Shirley N. Weber, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Supreme Court: Our amicus brief argues that the Taxpayer and Government Accountability Act unlawfully seeks to implement a constitutional revision, focusing on the major changes the Act makes to the voters' initiative power and the harms it will impose on voters who favor revenue-generating measures. (Case No. S281977, Date Filed: Feb. 1, 2024)
People of the State of California v. Eric Wiley, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review concerning whether the California Supreme Court's post-Apprendi precedent allowing for factors relating to prior convictions to be decided by a judge, not a jury, should be overruled. (Case No. S283326, Date Filed: Feb. 7, 2024)
Netchoice, LLC v. Rob Bonta, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: In a First Amendment case challenging AB 2273, California’s “Age Appropriate Design Code," our amicus brief focused on preserving strong protections for speech online while also allowing space for the government to regulate tech platforms and other companies, including for potential harms to children, the environment, and privacy interests. (Case No. 23-02969, Date Filed: Feb. 14, 2024)
People of the State of California v. Lee Sullivan, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District: Relying on both social-science research and evolving CA caselaw, our amicus brief argued that (1) despite common misapprehensions, rap lyrics and videos are not literal confessions – they are constitutionally protected speech; (2) recent amendments in California law mandate that courts strive to eliminate racial bias from criminal proceedings – and also to strictly limit the use of rap evidence at trial; and (3) the admission of rap lyrics and videos at trial contravened Mr. Sullivan's constitutional protections, infected the proceedings with racial bias, and caused him unfair prejudice. (Case No. A163607, Date Filed: Feb. 29, 2024)
Hugo Rolando Garcia Alvarez v. Merrick Garland, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief argues that Franco protections (i.e., the right to appointed counsel for mentally incompetent non-citizens in immigration detention) apply in truncated proceedings where all an immigration judge is considering is whether a person has a “reasonable fear” of persecution or torture. (Case No. 23-00026, Date Filed: Mar. 2, 2024)
People of the State of California v. Ronnie Louvier, Amicus Brief Filed in the San Francisco Superior Court: Relying on both social-science research and evolving CA caselaw, our brief argues that (1) despite common misapprehensions, rap lyrics and videos are not literal confessions – they are constitutionally protected speech; (2) recent amendments in California law mandate that courts strive to eliminate racial bias from criminal proceedings – and also to strictly limit the use of rap evidence at trial; and (3) the admission of rap lyrics and videos at trial contravened Mr. Louvier's constitutional protections, infected the proceedings with racial bias, and caused him unfair prejudice. (Case No. CRI-02388429, Date Filed: Mar. 14, 2024)
Yelp Inc. v. Ken Paxton, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief argues that the district court improperly abstained under the Younger doctrine from deciding Yelp's free-speech claims challenging Texas AG Paxton's enforcement action, focusing in particular on how Younger doesn't apply to bad-faith prosecutions by state officers. (Case No. 24-00581, Date Filed: Mar. 19, 2024)
U.S. Department of State v. Sandra Muñoz, Amicus Brief Filed in the Supreme Court of the United States: Our amicus brief argues that a consular officer's refusal of a visa to a U.S. citizen's noncitizen spouse impinges upon a constitutionally protected interest of the citizen, because the petitioner has a due-process interest in the visa denial. (Case No. 23-334, Mar. 28, 2024)
City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Gloria Johnson, Amicus Brief Filed in the Supreme Court of the United States: Our amicus brief supported the petitioner’s argument that laws punishing people for sleeping in public when they have nowhere to go violate the Eighth Amendment, and focused specifically on the history of the Eighth Amendment's proportionality principle, and why that principle applies to the kind of laws challenged here. (Case No. 23-175, Date Filed: Apr. 3, 2024)
Manohar Raju v. Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Supreme Court: Our amicus brief argued that taxpayers have standing under Code of Civil Procedure section 526a and the common law to sue state courts in particular, and state defendants in general. The brief specifically explored the history and purpose of taxpayer standing and described the consequences that restricting standing would have on systemic-reform litigation and government accountability. (Case No. S281001, Date Filed: Apr. 4, 2024)
Civil Rights Department v. Cathy's Creations, Inc., Amicus Brief Filed in the California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District: Our amicus brief explained why the defendant's refusal to provide a wedding cake based on a couple's sexual orientation violates California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, and why that refusal is not protected under the First Amendment. (Case No. F085800, Date Filed: Apr. 11, 2024)
People of the State of California v. Nicholas Aaron Robinson, Amicus Brief Filed in the Santa Clara Superior Court: Our amicus brief challenges San Jose Police Department's use of workplace violence restraining orders to restrict individual's First Amendment rights to speak out critically against the San Jose Police Department. (Case No. 1-22-AP-002832, Date Filed: May 8, 2024)
R.D. v. Superior Court of Sacramento County, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review concerning whether and which remedies are required when a court finds a violation of the California Racial Justice Act. (Case No. S284862, Date Filed: May 8, 2024)
People v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County (John Kevin Woodward), Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review arguing that a dismissal in furtherance of justice under Penal Code section 1385 only qualifies as an "acquittal" for purposes of double jeopardy when it explicitly rests on a finding that the evidence was insufficient. (Case No. S284711, Date Filed: May 22, 2024)
Center for Investigative Reporting v. U.S. Department of Labor, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief argues that demographic data reporting requirements on government contractors are critical for public accountability and essential to challenge systemic racial and gender disparities. (Case No. 24-880, Date Filed: Jul. 18, 2024)
In re Sirhan B. Sirhan, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review presenting whether the California Governor's right to veto grants of parole is unconstitutional as it relates to individuals who committed their life crime at age 25 or younger. Our letter argues the Governor's veto ability denies these individuals, who have been found suitable for parole, a meaningful opportunity to obtain release and is highly political. (Case No. S286234, Date Filed: Aug. 2, 2024)
U.S. v. Dahryl Lamont Reynolds, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief argued that felony non-association conditions of supervised release are racially discriminatory and counter to the goals of rehabilitation, deterrence, and de-stigmatization. (Case No. 24-2132, Date Filed: Aug. 5, 2024)
U.S. v. Victor Manuel Ramirez, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief supported en banc rehearing on whether the Fourth Amendment permits suspicionless parole-status questioning in traffic stops. The brief specifically highlighted the disproportionate effect suspicionless parole-status questioning will have on communities of color and non-parolees who reside with or near individuals on parole. (Case No. 22-50045, Date Filed: Aug. 12, 2024)
In re: Bonny Isabel Sanchez, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review concerning whether trial courts may intentionally set unaffordable money bail to achieve detention when they otherwise fail to make the findings required to order detention under California Constitution article 1, section 12. (Case No. S286045, Date Filed: Aug. 13, 2024)
M.A., A.D.C.C., Z.H., L.R., and Z.S. v. Regents of the University of California, Amicus Brief Filed in Alameda Superior Court: Our amicus brief argued that UC Irvine’s practice of imposing “interim” suspensions on students who protested on campus violated the students’ due process rights. (Case No. 24CV085280, Date Filed: Aug. 15, 2024)
Snap, Inc. v. Superior Court of San Diego County, Request for Depublication Filed in the California Supreme Court: Sought depublication of an appellate decision that misinterpreted the federal Stored Communication Act and urged further percolation of the statutory interpretation issue. (Case No. S286267, Date Filed: Aug. 15, 2024)
J.N. v. Oregon Department of Education, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief supported a challenge by disabled students to the Oregon Department of Education’s practice of subjecting students to informal discipline in the form of shortened school days as a result of disability-related behaviors. The brief focused on the importance of a heavy mootness standard where state actors make mid-litigation legislative or policy changes that do not actually remedy plaintiffs’ claims. (Case No. 24-2080, Date Filed: Aug. 27, 2024)
Ethan Zuckerman v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Amicus Brief Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California: Our brief supported the plaintiff’s claim for Section 230 immunity, underscoring that a core statutory purpose of that provision was to encourage the development of technology that empowers users. The brief also lifts up a variety of examples of that technology (from ad-blockers to anti-harassment tech) that would be protected by a favorable ruling. (Case No. 3:24-cv-02596, Date Filed: Sept. 5, 2024)
Sergio Serratto v. Town of Mount Pleasant, Amicus Brief Filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Westchester: Our amicus brief supported the broad application of the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act of New York, drawing on our history of litigating cases under California’s Voting Rights Act—the first state voting rights act in the country. (Case No. 55442/2004, Date Filed: Sept. 12, 2024)
In Re Ex Parte Application of Gregory Gliner, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our brief explained the importance of free speech protections for anonymous online speech and encouraged the Ninth Circuit to direct district courts to apply the heightened Highfields standard to all Section 1782 attempts to unmask anonymous speakers. (Case No. 24-4624, Date Filed: Sept. 13, 2024)
U.S. v. Steven Duarte, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our brief argued that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment as applied to someone convicted only of nonviolent offenses, addresses the statute's overbreadth and expansive scope, as well as its disproportionate harms on people of color. (Case No. 22-50048, Date Filed: Sept. 24, 2024)
X Corp. v. Center for Countering Digital Hate, Inc., Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief argues that X (formerly Twitter) should not be able to enforce its terms of service to penalize the use of automated data collection — known as “scraping” — to inform research and public criticism of X. (Case No. 24-2643, Date Filed: Sept. 27, 2024)
Nelson Sequeira v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California: Our amicus brief supported a challenge to the Department of Homeland Security’s suspicionless bulk surveillance of money transfers, arguing there is no legally protected interest in issuing overbroad subpoenas to money transfer companies. (Case No. 4:22-cv-07996, Date Filed: Sept. 30, 2024)
In Re: @UCSBLIBERATEDZONE and @SAYGENOCIDEUCSB, Amicus Brief Filed in Santa Barbara Superior Court: Our amicus brief supported a motion to quash an overbroad search warrant served by the University of California Santa Barbara Police Department targeting two Instagram accounts, in which we highlighted the overbroad warrant's impact on the university community's First Amendment speech and privacy rights. (Case No. 24CR07427, Date Filed: Oct. 10, 2024)
Steven Renderos v. Clearview AI, Inc, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District: Our amicus brief argued that Clearview’s invasive face surveillance practices are not First Amendment protected speech under the state anti-SLAPP law and that—if the court reaches the second step of the anti-SLAPP analysis—it should reject Clearview’s challenges to the state constitutional right to privacy and find that plaintiffs have shown a reasonable probability of success on their invasion of privacy claim. (Case No. A167179, Date Filed: Nov. 4, 2024)
Sellers v. Superior Court of Sacramento County, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition for review contending that a de minimis or legal amount of marijuana in a car cannot supply probable cause to conduct a warrantless vehicle search after Proposition 64. Our letter also details how the appellate court decision will expand the disproportionate enforcement of cannabis laws and pretextual traffic stops on communities of color, especially Black and Latine drivers. (Case No. S287164, Date Filed: Nov. 7, 2024)
Terry D. Bemore v. Superior Court of San Diego, Amicus Brief Filed in the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District: Our amicus brief argued why, under the specific facts of this case, private counsel should be allowed to bring a habeas petition under the Racial Justice Act because the public defender is "unavailable." (Case No. D084579, Date Filed: Nov 26, 2024)
Family Violence Appellate Project v. Superior Courts of California, Amicus Letter Submitted in the California Supreme Court: Supported petition asking the Court to exercise its original jurisdiction to determine whether Government Code section 69957.2, which prohibits electronic recording of most civil proceedings, violates the state constitution. Our letter focused on how the statute violates the state equal protection guarantee because it creates an unconstitutional wealth-based classification that burdens the fundamental right to appellate review. (Case No. S288176, Date Filed: Dec. 13, 2024)
John Doe v. Merrick Garland, Amicus Brief Filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Our amicus brief supported en banc review of the panel's erroneous holding that the Eastern District of California, not the Northern District, is the proper venue for habeas petitions brought by people detained by ICE at Golden State Annex. (Case No. 23-15361, Date Filed: Dec. 20, 2024)

Amicus Briefs

2025

2024

Become a Member