Learn how you can help ensure that the principle of due process endures this crisis
Learn how you can help ensure that the principle of due process endures this crisis
Amicus Brief in Support of Appellant
3d Circuit Court of Appeals
Filed Nov. 9, 2020
TOPICS: over-criminalization; fraud statutes; federalism; notice
In this brief, we argue that the government's attempt to prosecute breaches of state contractual provisions under federal criminal property fraud statutes violates fundamental principles regarding notice and federalism.
Filed with Americans for Prosperity Foundation, Cato Institute, and NACDL.
Amicus Brief in Support of Rehearing
10th Circuit Court of Appeals
Filed Oct. 12, 2020
TOPICS: rule of lenity; agency deference
Our brief tackles the intersection of the rule of lenity and Chevron deference, concluding that the rule of lenity should prevail when such a conflict occurs in order to preserve proper separation of powers in our federal government and fulfill the constitutional requirement of fair notice.
Due Process Institute thanks John Cline for his amicus support on this matter.
UPDATE: Due Process Institute filed a previous brief in this case in 2019. The court has granted a Petition for Rehearing En Banc.
Amicus Brief in Support of Certiorari
U.S. Supreme Court
Filed Dec. 22, 2020
TOPICS: rule of lenity; agency deference
This amicus brief tackles the tension arising from two principles: Stinson deference to an agency’s interpretation of its rules and the rule of lenity. Because the rule of lenity requires courts to interpret ambiguities in criminal statutes in favor of criminal defendants, courts must not “reflexively” accept the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s commentary on ambiguous Sentencing Guidelines. The proper application of the principles of lenity advances due process, the separation of powers, and other fundamental constitutional protections.
Filed with The New Civil Liberties Alliance.
Amicus Brief in Support of Certiorari
U.S. Supreme Court
Filed Dec. 16, 2020
TOPICS: rule of lenity; agency deference
This brief argues the courts do not owe deference to agency commentary that creates harsher sentences. By applying Stinson deference in this case, the court increased defendant's U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range and violation of the principles of lenity and due process. We urge the court to reconsider its outdated position and protect the rights of defendants.
Filed with The New Civil Liberties Alliance.
Amicus Brief in Support of Certiorari
U.S. Supreme Court
Filed Jan. 21, 2021
TOPICS: rule of lenity; agency deference
In this amicus brief, we argue courts should not provide deference to the U.S. Sentencing Commission unless the three requirements set by Kisor v. Wilkie are met. Deference is only owed if the agency’s regulation is genuinely ambiguous, the reading of the regulation is reasonable, and the interpretation entitles the agency to a controlling weight. If this entire criteria is not fulfilled, criminal defendants are entitled to lenity and courts must not reflexively accept implausible and draconian readings of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.
Due Process Institute thanks Theodore Howard, Boyd Garriott, and Lukman Azeez of Wiley Rein for their pro bono work on this case.
Amicus Brief in support of Rehearing
6th Circuit Court of Appeals
Filed Oct. 5, 2020
TOPICS: civil asset forfeiture; prompt post-seizure hearing
This amicus brief tackles the important issue of how due process applies when a municipality seizes property through civil asset forfeiture and does not grant the owner a prompt, post-seizure hearing.
Filed with DKT Liberty Project, Institute for Justice, and Mackinac Center for Public Policy.
OUTCOME: The Sixth Circuit denied rehearing on Nov. 23, 2020.
Amicus Brief in Support of Plaintiff
5th Circuit Court of Appeals
Filed Apr. 23, 2019
TOPICS: civil asset forfeiture; prompt post-seizure hearing
This case considers whether there is a due process right to a prompt post-seizure hearing when one's property is seized by the government.
Filed with Cato Institute and NACDL. Due Process Institute thanks Cynthia Orr for her pro bono work on this case.
OUTCOME: Unfortunately, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that it is not constitutionally required for a property owner whose property is seized through civil asset forfeiture to receive a prompt, post-seizure hearing while awaiting a formal forfeiture hearing. You can read the court's full opinion here.
Amicus Brief in support of Certiorari
U.S. Supreme Court
Filed Oct. 2019
TOPICS: rule of lenity; Chevron deference
At issue in this case is the precedence of the "rule of lenity" doctrine versus Chevron deference in the interpretation of language that defines a crime.
Due Process Institute thanks John Cline for his pro bono work on this case as well as The Buckeye Institute for joining our brief.
OUTCOME: Unfortunately, the petition for certiorari was denied Mar. 2, 2020.
Amicus Brief in support of Certiorari
U.S. Supreme Court
Filed Oct. 24, 2019
TOPICS: per se rule; presumptions that remove element of crime from jury's consideration
We argue that the per se rule in antitrust law operates to relieve the government of its burden to prove an essential element of a criminal offense and thus violates a defendant's 5th and 6th Amendment rights.
Due Process Institute thanks Erin E. Murphy (Kirkland & Ellis, DC) and Alyssa Kalisky (Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago) for their pro bono work in this case.
OUTCOME: Unfortunately, the petition for certiorari was denied Jan. 13, 2020.
Amicus Brief in Support of Petitioner
U.S. Supreme Court
Filed Sep. 11, 2018
TOPICS: civil asset forfeiture; excessive fines + fees; incorporation
This case centered around the civil forfeiture of the plaintiff's $42,000 vehicle for a crime that had a maximum $10,000 criminal fine.
Filed with Cato Institute, DKT Liberty Project, Federal Bar Association Civil Rights Section, Goldwater Institute, and Texas Public Policy Foundation.
For more information, please visit our 8th Amendment Amicus Briefs collection.
Copyright © 2024 Due Process Institute - All Rights Reserved.
Please note: contributions to Due Process Institute, a 501(c)(4), are not deductible for federal tax purposes.
This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you accept our use of cookies.