District of Columbia v. Donald J. Trump
Overview of the Case
Amicus Briefs
In concert with our legislative advocacy and member education and support, the National Police Accountability Project files amicus briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals and state appellate courts in cases involving abuses of power by police and corrections officers, as well as other government officials. Our amicus curiae work is motivated by a recognition that positive rulings in significant cases addressing police and corrections officer misconduct stand to create powerful case law that can expand access and avenues to recourse for citizens whose civil rights have been violated.
Instructions for Requesting Amicus Support
Use the fields below to filter by court, amicus counsel or parties, date filed, and tags.
Landor v. Louisiana
Case Background: A Rastfarian man incarcerated in Louisiana state prison had his dreadlocks forcibly cut by a correctional officer. He filed a suit under RLUIPA seeking monetary damages. The Fifth Circuit held that damage remedies are not available under RLUIPA and the Supreme Court granted cert on the question. I attached the cert-level briefing for additional context.
Proposed Brief: Our brief focuses on the importance of damages in advancing the noncompensatory goals of civil rights statutes and discusses the legislative history of RLUIPA.
Martin, et al. vs. United States of America, et al.
Summary of the case:
Michigan Immigrant Rights Center vs. Gretchen Whitmer
This case is before the Michigan State Supreme Court. It is a technical case about when claims accrue in Michigan state court. Our brief focuses on why civil rights plaintiffs should be given time to investigate claims and file a complaint.
Sugar Law Center and Farmstand are representing the plaintiffs.
United States of America v. Keith Rodney Moore
This brief urges the Fourth Circuit to affirm the lower court's decision properly applying circuit precedent to the plaintiff's selective enforcement defense. The selective enforcement defense was appropriately supported by statistics revealing significant racial disparities in the Richmond Police Department’s (“RPD”) enforcement of traffic stops against Black drivers compared to their white counterparts. The evidence supplied by the plaintiff sufficiently demonstrated both discriminatory effect and discriminatory purpose, meeting the threshold for a selective enforcement claim.
State of New Mexico v. Trevizo
Case Summary
Barnes v. Felix, et al.
The question presented is whether the Supreme Court should reject the "moment of the threat" doctrine and permit the Fifth Circuit (and other circuits that have adopted the same approach) to evaluate the totality of the circumstances when evaluating the constitutionality of an officer’s actions.
Coffey v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
This brief is in support of the petitioner, Mr. Coffey, who is suing under the Post Conviction Relief Act to challenge his wrongful conviction that resulted from coercive investigation tactics. More on his case here. Our brief explains: (1) how coercive interrogation tactics are likely to result in wrongful convictions; and (2) Philadelphia Police Department's documented practice of using coercive investigation tactics to obtain false accusations in the '80s and '90s.
Michigan Immigrant Rights Center (MIRC) vs. Gretchen Whitmer
Michigan Immigrant Rights Center (MIRC) vs. Whitmer is a more technical case about when claims accrue in Michigan state court. Our brief focuses on why civil rights plaintiffs should be given time to investigate claims and file a complaint.