Miscellaneous

Million Amici March: Does Heller Have Too Many Friends?

By Anne Skove, Esq.

We've ignored D.C. v. Heller thus far, because others are doing such a great job, and anyway we were too enthralled by sunshine, Mormons, and mediators to notice.

But the long list of amicus briefs amazes us, from a court perspective. Petitioner's supporters include Erwin Chemerinsky, former DOJ officials, criminal justice professors, district attorneys, the NAACP Legal defense and Educational Fund, the ABA, several states, linguistics and English professors, and certain members of Congress.

In the other corner, the American Legislative Exchange, the Buckeye Firearms Foundation, Disabled Veterans for Self-Defense, criminologists, the Rutherford Institute, the Pink Pistols, Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty, the Alaska Fish and Wildlife Conservation Fund, the NRA (OK, no surprise there), several other states, the American Center for Law and Justice, the Institute for Justice, the Foundation for Moral Law, retired military officers, the Maricopa County Attorney's Office, and many others support the respondent.

Does it matter if one or both sides has a list of best friends willing to shout out to the SCOTUS for them? Not much.

Why do it, then? Because the SCOTUS is located in DC. This is how things are done there. You get the alphabet soup of organizations on your side. You build coalitions. You help your friends and they (hopefully) help you. Every hair on ever single issue must be supported or denounced, or maybe renounced, or possibly rejected, so that you can one day say that you did so (or that you SO did not!).

See Amicus Briefs Are Ammo for Supreme Court Gun Case, Marcia Coyle, National Law Journal (March 10, 2008). For a nice rundown of the what, why, and how of amicus briefs, see Use of an Amicus Brief, Ronald B. Standler (2001-02).

Full post as published by court-o-rama.org on March 18, 2008 (boomark / email).