The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland, where it called upon the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to keep in place a preliminary nationwide injunction on the positively Orwellian Corporate Transparency Act—a federal surveillance program of small businesses, to which your Buckeye Institute strongly objects.

In response to the court’s invitation—The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Fulton v. Fulton County Board of Commissioners, urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to reaffirm the constitutional right to seek just compensation when the government takes private property. The Eleventh Circuit requested the brief from The Buckeye Institute recognizing its insightful and reasoned legal arguments in other property rights cases

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Newman v. Moore with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, arguing that where government “proceedings risk limiting an individual’s rights and—like a judicial disciplinary proceeding—risk confidence in the judiciary, those proceedings should be open to the public.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in B.A. v. Tri County Area Schools, calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to tell Tri County Area Schools that their students’ political speech—even when it is expressed on a Let’s Go Brandon t-shirt—is protected by the First Amendment.

The Buckeye Institute, once again joined by Mountain States Legal Foundation, filed its second amicus brief in Smith & Wesson v. Mexico, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to tell Mexico that it cannot shift the blame for its failure to control drug cartel crime in its country onto American companies. This “is exactly the type of thing Congress sought to protect against when it passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in a consolidation of eight cases—In Re: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Department of Transportation, Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standard—before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. In its brief, Buckeye calls on the court to stop the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) from forcing a de facto electric-vehicle mandate on the American people, a mandate Congress did not give NHTSA the power to impose.

The Buckeye Institute filed its amicus brief in GHP Management Corp. v. Los Angeles, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and “affirm the sanctity of private property rights.” The Manhattan Institute joined The Buckeye Institute on its brief. In their brief, amici argue that Los Angeles’ pandemic-era eviction ban deprived property owners of a fundamental element of their property rights in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which says that the government cannot take private property without just compensation.

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Holman v. Vilsack with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit calling on the court to protect access to America’s legal system as Congress intended when it passed the 1980 Equal Access to Justice Act. In its brief, The Buckeye Institute called on the full Sixth Circuit to reconsider a ruling by a three-judge panel that denied Mr. Holman his attorneys’ fees—in violation of the Equal Access to Justice Act.

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond and St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the cases and reaffirm that the government cannot discriminate against religious schools by excluding them from generally available programs. “One thing, at least, is undisputed—children in Oklahoma, and across the nation, deserve a high-quality education to prepare them for college and real life.” 

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear Speech First v. Whitten and find that Indiana University’s bias incidents policy violates students’ First Amendment rights. “Civility and inclusion are laudable goals and, undeniably, an important component of a college education. But when the policies used to pursue those goals chill free speech and violate the U.S. Constitution, those policies cannot be allowed to stand.”