On Tuesday, January 8, 2002, a petition for writ of certiorari was filed in the United States Supreme Court on behalf of Edgar Morales and four other residents of Texas seeking review of the constitutionality of Census 2000. At issue is whether Congress has the power to require, under penalty of law, that the American people answer questions on race, employment, housing and other subjects invading their privacy and totally unrelated to the two express constitutional purposes for the decennial census — apportionment of representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, and the imposition of direct taxes.
On October 15, 2001, the United States Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari to review whether the First Amendment guarantee of anonymous speech barred the Village of Stratton, Ohio, from enforcing a permit system which required “canvassers, solicitors, peddlars [or] hawkers” to identify themselves before going from door to door of private residences for the “purpose of advertising, promoting, selling and/or explaining any product, service, organization or cause.” (Emphasis added).
President Bush issued a new executive order declaring another state of national emergency and invoking certain additional standby powers. President Bush relies on actions of the United Nations as a principal source of his authority to defend the United States. This curious practice perpetuates the approach taken by President Clinton.
Since his inauguration, President George W. Bush has issued two Executive Orders declaring national emergencies. The second was issued September 14, retroactive to September 11, 2001.
President Bush’s declaration of a national state of emergency invokes stand-by powers contained in Executive Order, No. 12656 issued by President Ronald W. Reagan. Attached is a synopsis of the Executive Order as well as the Executive Order itself.
President Wilson was the first President to declare a national emergency, on February 5, 1917. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry S Truman, Richard M. Nixon, James E. Carter, Ronald W. Reagan, George H.W. Bush, William J. Clinton, and George Walker Bush have all issued national emergency declarations.
On Monday, September 10, 2001, nearly six years after he refused to put on the United Nations uniform and to submit to the command and control of a foreign military officer, Michael New has taken his fight for justice to the United States Supreme Court.
At the heart of his appeal is New’s right to his day in court. In a petition for writ of certiorari, New is asking the High Court to overrule the judgment of three military courts which essentially refused to deal with his claims that the Constitution does not allow the President unilaterally to order American soldiers to fight for a foreign government.
The City of Louisville and Jefferson County, Kentucky, enacted ordinances to prohibit discrimination based on “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” J. Barrett Hyman, M.D. held Biblical and constitutional objections to complying with these ordinances in his practice of obstetrics and gynecology, and his suit to have them declared unlawful was dismissed by the trial court. Our firm was retained to file an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit explaining the unconstitutional ambiguities inherent in these ordinances and why they should be declared void for vagueness.
Our firm filed an amicus curiae brief in this case, which comes on a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, where a bare majority ruled that Section 109 of the clean air act violated Article I, Section 1, of the United States Constitution which vests legislative power in Congress. The case generated a number of opinions, the majority insisting that there were still meaningful constitutional limits on Congressional delegation of powers, and the dissent contending that the doctrine was no longer taken seriously as a limit on Congressional power.
Today, the Supreme Court of North Dakota unanimously reversed a Cass County District Court order that would have dismantled and reconstituted the board of directors of Family Life Services, a Christian pro-life ministry in the Fargo-Morehead community. North Dakota’s high court ruled that the lower court’s order turning Family Life Services over to persons whose religious views met with the approval of the trial judge violated Family Life Services’ First Amendment rights of freedom of religion.
Our firm filed a second brief in the United States Supreme Court in the Boy Scout case — this time after certiorari was granted — on the merits of the Boy Scouts’ arguments for reversal.
Today we filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of eight members of Congress (Hon. John T. Doolittle, Hon. George Radanovich, Hon. Tom Tancredo, Hon. Bob Stump, Hon. Barbara Cubin, Hon. Tom A. Coburn, Hon. Wally Herger, and Hon. John E. Perterson) and four nonprofit organizations (Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, Gun Owners Foundation, Citizens United Foundation, and Concerned Women for America).
The Olson law firm filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Public Advocate of the United States and the Lincoln Institute for Research and Education defending the right of the Boy Scouts to determine their own leadership.
This brief urges that the U.S. Supreme Court grant certiorari and review the decision of the New Jersey Supreme Court which compels the Boy Scouts there to retain a homosexual activist as a scoutmaster, under the New Jersey state “Law Against Discrimination.” (The Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari.)
Our firm filed an amicus brief for the National Citizens Legal Network, U.S. Border Control, Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, English First Foundation, and Policy Analysis Center in the case ofClinton v. Glavin in the United States Supreme Court in support of appellees.
Today our firm filed a Brief for Appellants explaining how the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act violates the First Amendment.
Our firm filed an amicus brief for the Abraham Lincoln Foundation for Public Policy Research, Inc. in the case of Michel v. Anderson in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia supporting the plaintiff’s request for a preliminary injunction.
The U.S. House of Representatives had adopted a rule change permitting non-Member Delegates from the District of Columbia and the United States territories and the Resident Commissioner for Puerto Rico to vote in violation of Article I of the Constitution. Our amicus brief argued the exercise of voting rights by delegates would constitute an illegal and unconstitutional exercise of legislative power.
Representing Congressman Dickinson, this brief successfully urged the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to resolve the distinction between permissible and impermissible uses by unions of agency fees paid by those working men and woman who choose not to join unions but who are required to pay those fees under law.