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.

Date Filed

Jonathan Mercedes v. City of New York et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Wed, 02/01/2023 - 09:05

Jonathan Mercedes v. City of New York et. al. involves a false arrest under NY State Mental Hygiene Law Section 9.41. Jonathan Mercedes was arrested by police despite officers observing no action by Mr. Mercedes that indicated that he was a danger to himself or others. The NY State Mental Hygiene Law has received heightened public attention recently, following NYC Mayor Eric Adams' announcement that he intends to use it to forcibly hospitalize unhoused people.

Roger Wayne Parker v. County of Riverside, et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Sun, 01/08/2023 - 22:08

The issue in Roger Wayne Parker v. County of Riverside, et. al. is whether a plaintiff can bring a Section 1983 suit for Brady violations if they aren't ultimately convicted of the crime for which exculpatory evidence was withheld or suppressed.

Our brief focuses on the prejudice innocent individuals experience when exculpatory evidence is withheld, due process protections against withholding exculpatory evidence, and the importance of civil rights cases to deter future Brady violations. 

 

Coalition on Homelessness v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Wed, 12/21/2022 - 15:10

Coalition on Homelessness v. City and County of San Francisco et al challenges San Francisco's policy of towing safely parked cars solely because the owner has 5+ parking tickets. The policy disproportionately harms unhoused people who live in their vehicles. Our brief argues that allowing police to initiate these tows without a warrant violates the Fourth Amendment and elevates the risk of police violence by unnecessarily increasing police contact with the public.

McKinney v. City of Middletown et. al.

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Tue, 10/18/2022 - 11:32

The majority panel’s decision enlarges the realm of police encounters where less lethal force can be applied for a long enough period to become deadly. In light of the number of deaths that result from prolonged police dog maulings, tasings, and restraint holds, immunizing these forms of force against a subdued individual could lead to more avoidable police killings in the Second Circuit. While the majority’s opinion seeks to justify its divergence from other circuits because the officers may have feared a subdued Mr.

Frasier v. Evans

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Fri, 10/14/2022 - 11:10

This brief argues that the First Amendment protects the right to record the police and that such recordings are a vital tool of community oversight of police.

Thompson v. Clark - Merits Brief

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Fri, 10/14/2022 - 11:04

Thompson v. Clark asks whether an individual seized during criminal proceedings in violation of the Fourth Amendment must prove that the criminal proceedings ended in a manner indicative of their innocence before bringing a section 1983 action to redress the violation of their constitutional rights. This brief argues that criminal proceedings terminating in a manner indicating innocence is not a requirement for individuals seeking a 1983 claim.

Thompson v. Clark et. al. - Petition Brief

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Fri, 10/14/2022 - 10:54

Thompson v. Clark asks whether an individual seized during criminal proceedings in violation of the Fourth Amendment must prove that the criminal proceedings ended in a manner indicative of their innocence before bringing a section 1983 action to redress the violation of their constitutional rights. This brief argues that criminal proceedings terminating in a manner indicating innocence is not a requirement for individuals seeking a 1983 claim.

Hernandez v. Mesa

Submitted by Jane Clayton on Fri, 10/14/2022 - 10:48

In Hernandez v. Mesa, the parents of 15-year-old Mexican national Sergio Adrian Hernandez Guereca sued US Border Patrol Agent Jesus Mesa, Jr. Mesa was standing on US soil and Guereca on Mexican soil when Mesa shot and killed Guereca. This brief argues that Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) provides a cause of action against immigration enforcement agents as it does for all other federal law enforcement agents.