The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Bowers v. Oneida County Industrial Development Agency, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and overturn its infamous decision in Kelo v. New London, which allows the government to take private property and give it to a private developer. “This case presents a good opportunity for the court to fix the unjust results of Kelo. It is time for the court to overturn Kelo.”

The Buckeye Institute filed amicus briefs in Jackson v. Southfield Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative and Yono v. Ingham County, two important property rights cases in That State Up North. The Michigan Supreme Court requested briefs from The Buckeye Institute recognizing the expertise of Buckeye’s legal team and their well-reasoned legal arguments. While That Team Up North thinks it is perfectly acceptable to steal signs, The Buckeye Institute urges the Michigan Supreme Court to reject this blasé attitude towards stealing and uphold the constitutional rights of private property owners. 

The Buckeye Institute filed a lawsuit on behalf of Matthew Sheldon of Carrollton, Ohio demanding that the government union—the Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE)/American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Local 541—stop its illegal wage theft and return the money it took out of Mr. Sheldon’s paycheck after he quit the union. Sheldon v. OAPSE was filed in Carroll County Court of Common Pleas.

The Buckeye Institute filed its third amicus brief in Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the Biden administration’s attempt to enforce the Corporate Transparency Act—an Orwellian federal surveillance program of small businesses. “The Framers of the U.S. Constitution designed the First Amendment to protect our right to associate, free from the government’s prying eyes.” 

The Buckeye Institute filed its second amicus brief in Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland, calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to grant an emergency petition for rehearing en banc (by the full court) and reinstate a preliminary nationwide injunction on the Orwellian Corporate Transparency Act—a federal surveillance program of small businesses. This new filing follows a December 23 ruling by a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit that lifted the preliminary injunction.

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.”