Supreme Court Preview Webinar

Listen to a recording here 

National Law Journal Article about the SLLC

Center Advocates for State and Local Governments discusses the SLLC’s mission, history, current amicus activity

SLLC September 2014 Newsletter

Find out what's new at the SLLC here

Search

 
 





The State and Local Legal Center (SLLC) files amicus curiae briefs in support of state and local governments in the U.S. Supreme Court, conducts moot courts for attorneys arguing before the Supreme Court, and provides other assistance to States and local governments in connection with Supreme Court litigation. 

SLLC Briefs Recently Filed

Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association 

Must a federal agency engage in notice-and-comment before significantly changing an interpretive rule? (Summary)

Alabama Department of Revenue v. CSX Transportation

What is the proper comparison class under 4-R, and should a court look at a tax scheme as a whole to determine if railroads are being discriminated against?  (Summary)

T-Mobile South v. City of Roswell

Must a letter denying a cell tower construction application provide reasons to meet the Telecommunications Act “in writing” requirement.  (Summary)

Comptroller v. Wynne

Whether the U.S. Constitution requires states to give a credit for taxes paid on income earned out-of-state.  (Summary)

Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk

Whether time spent in security screenings is compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act.  (Summary)

North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC 

Do state boards with members who are market participants elected by their peers have to be “actively supervised” to be exempt from federal antitrust law.  (Summary)

SLLC Cases Recently Decided

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores

The Affordable Care Act’s birth control mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), as applied to closely held corporations (Summary)

McCullen v. Coakley

A state law making it a crime to stand on a public road or sidewalk within 35 feet of an abortion clinic violates the First Amendment (Summary)

Plumhoff v. Rickard

Police officers didn’t violate the Fourth Amendment when they shot and killed the driver of a fleeing vehicle to end a dangerous car chase.  And even if they did, the officers were entitled to qualified immunity. (Summary)

Wood v. Moss

Two Secret Service agents who moved anti-Bush protesters a block further from the President than pro-Bush supporters were entitled to qualified immunity.  (Summary)

Martin M. Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States 

An abandoned railroad right-of-way granted by the General Railroad Right of Way Act of 1875 goes to the person who has acquired the land underlying the right-of-way rather than the United States.  (Summary)

Sprint Communications Company v. Jacobs

Younger abstention only applies in three “exceptional circumstances.”  (Summary)