Damages
S2, Ep 6 | False Friends of the Court
Jun 7, 2022
This podcast explores the surge in anonymously funded amicus briefs, the power of Amicus briefs in swaying judges' opinions, the Supreme Court's disregard for ethics and transparency, and the implications of climate cases and political speech.
25:11
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- Amicus briefs have evolved from pointing out similarities between cases to being used as tools for anonymously funded briefs pushing specific agendas, with a significant increase in their usage and influence in recent years.
- Disclosure rules for amicus briefs are limited, allowing for a lack of transparency and enabling dark money-funded efforts to oppose improved disclosure and transparency, ultimately aiming to build a constitutional right to dark money and tilt the court in favor of certain agendas.
Deep dives
The Rise of Amicus Briefs
Amicus briefs, also known as friend of the court briefs, were originally used to point out similarities between current cases and previous cases before the internet and accessible libraries. However, in recent years, they have become a tool for anonymously funded briefs pushing specific agendas. The number of amicus briefs filed has skyrocketed, with a 95% increase from 1995 to 2014 and over 940 briefs filed in the 2020 term. Connected lawyers who have experience with the court can improve the chances of the court viewing a case. Justices are citing amicus briefs more in their rulings, from 38% in the 1994-2003 terms to over 100% today.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
