1580:
2214:
49:
2226:
2203:
503:
is a lawyer, rather than an outside entity, who is asked by the Court to provide submissions in such a way as to make sure the legal issues affecting the interests of all parties are properly canvassed. Where one of the parties (e.g. the accused in a criminal case) is unrepresented (and is ineligible
167:
typically refers to what in some other jurisdictions is known as an intervenor: a person or organization who requests to provide legal submissions so as to offer a relevant alternative or additional perspective regarding the matters in dispute. In the
American courts, the amicus may be referred to as
556:
may be appointed is when an accused is self-represented in a trial for offences such as sexual assault or assault in a domestic violence context. An unrepresented accused has the right to cross-examine Crown witnesses, but it may be undesirable to permit him or her to personally cross-examine, for
452:
brief must identify which party the brief is supporting, or if the brief supports only affirmance or reversal. The Court also requires that all non-governmental amici identify those providing a monetary contribution to the preparation or submission of the brief. Briefs must be prepared in booklet
414:
academic perspectives on the case. For example, if the law gives deference to a history of legislation of a certain topic, a historian may choose to evaluate the claim from their specialized expertise. Economists, statisticians, sociologists, etc. may choose to do the same. Newspaper editorials,
524:
could include a highly complex or technical trial, an unsophisticated accused or one with cognitive or psychiatric challenges, or an unruly and disruptive accused. In some cases, when an accused has retained counsel for part of the trial but then fires that counsel, and if the judge finds that
633:
The issue was re-examined in US – Lead and
Bismuth II which concerned the imposition of duties by the US on certain imported hot rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel from the UK. The Panel at first instance affirmed the position in the US – Shrimp case and accepted two
516:. The lawyer is not retained by and does not represent the unrepresented party as such, but has a responsibility to ensure that points of law of importance to the party's case are brought to the attention of the court. For example, in the case of a criminal trial, the
341:
briefs are a way to articulate those concerns, so that the possibly broad legal or public policy implications of the court's anticipated decisions will not depend solely on the positions and arguments advanced by the parties directly involved in the case.
658:
briefs received by the Panel, only two that were submitted by the
European Community, were accepted. The panel did not provide any explanation as to why they were accepted or rejected. On appeal, the Appellate Body relied on Rule 16(1) of the
373:(NORML), frequently submit such briefs to advocate for or against a particular legal change or interpretation. If a decision could affect an entire industry, companies other than the litigants may wish to have their concerns heard. In the
1881:
540:
in situations in which a party is represented by counsel, but issues emerge in a highly specialized or technical area of the law, on which the judge wants submissions from a lawyer with special expertise in that area. For example, in
2020:
1920:
1915:
447:
briefs sought to be filed in cases pending before it. Supreme Court Rule 37 states, in part, such a brief should cover "relevant matter" not dealt with by the parties which "may be of considerable help". The cover of an
1426:
Appellate Body Report, United States – Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WTO Doc WT/DS138/AB/R, AB-2000-1 (10 May 2000),
2134:
2060:
2055:
2050:
2045:
2040:
2035:
2030:
2025:
1569:
1886:
586:
are "nonprofit organizations and the institutional subjects, bearers of collective or diffuse interests related to the issue of constitutionality" who "may submit a written opinion to the constitutional Court".
1908:
1891:
638:
briefs that were submitted. On appeal, the
Appellate Body relied on Article 17.9 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding and Rule 16(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review to create rules to accept
2157:
2122:
2006:
1414:
Panel Report, United States – Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WTO Doc WT/DS138/R (23 December 1999),
1896:
1405:
Panel Report, United States – Imposition of
Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom, WTO Doc WT/DS138/R (23 December 1999)
2016:
1903:
1564:
549:
to provide detailed submissions on the intersection between constitutional rights and prison law, explaining why this was normally outside the ken even of experienced criminal defence counsel.
1871:
1665:
603:(WTO) dispute settlement system is controversial. The controversy arises due to the governmental nature of WTO disputes. As only WTO members have access to the system, any non-members such as
1876:
618:
briefs was US – Shrimp. The case concerned a ban by the US on imports of all shrimp and shrimp products not caught with turtle excluder devices. The panel at first instance rejected the two
187:
who is asked by the court to provide legal submissions regarding issues that would otherwise not be aired properly, often because one or both of the parties is not represented by counsel.
630:
who held a panel had authority to accept, consider or reject briefs under
Articles 12 and 13 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding regardless of whether they were expressly solicited.
563:
permits the judge to order that the accused will not personally cross-examine the witness, and to name an uninvolved lawyer to conduct the cross-examination in place of the accused.
1559:
370:
1588:
2011:
218:
are still debated. Some scholars simply explain the Latin expression with the fact that the cultural elites' (including the jurists') language of the Anglo-Saxon world was
1018:
752:
In some cases, the court may appoint amicus curiae in a case that involves children, so as to help the court in determining what is in the best interests of the children.
2129:
1743:
520:
will have the responsibility to ensure that the accused's right to make full answer and defence is upheld. Examples of situations that could call for the appointment of
59:
2117:
1989:
2162:
1457:
Appellate Body Report, European
Community – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos, WTO Doc WT/DS135/AB/R, AB-2000-11 (12 March 2001), -.
1339:
1531:
1994:
1554:
1278:"Testimonial Support for Vulnerable Adults (Bill C-2): Case Law Review (2009–2012). 5. Preventing Questioning by Self-represented Accused: Section 486.3"
2167:
1396:
Appellate Body Report, United States – Import
Prohibition on Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WTO Doc WT/DS58/AB/R12, AB-1994-4 (12 October 1998),
274:
317:
was to help the court by expounding the law impartially, or if one of the parties were unrepresented, by advancing the legal arguments on his behalf.
487:
briefs on both sides of recent cases dealing with divisive cultural issues, such as same-sex marriage and expansive conceptions of gender identity.
765:
2139:
349:
are generally organizations with sizable legal budgets. In the United States, for example, non-profit legal advocacy organizations, such as the
234:. The Italian academic Giovanni Criscuoli, while admitting the theoretical possibility of eventually comparing it with the Roman figure of the "
2188:
282:
1958:
923:
337:
case under appeal; attorneys focus on the facts and arguments most favorable to their clients. Where a case may have broader implications,
2078:
278:
1445:
Panel Report, European Community – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos, WTO Doc WT/DS135/R (18 September 2000), .
1110:
667:
briefs. Of the 11 briefs submitted, the Appellate Body accepted none on the basis they failed to comply with these additional procedures.
366:
1049:
731:
1436:
Panel Report, European Community – Measures Affecting Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos, WTO Doc WT/DS135/R (18 September 2000).
622:
briefs that were submitted by environmental groups, on the basis they were not expressly solicited by the panel under Article 13 of the
460:
brief is being filed by the federal government (or one of its officers or agents) or a U.S. state, permission of the court (by means of
1481:
1137:
1866:
1715:
1652:
1616:
1540:
1026:
469:
440:
1475:
1327:
1172:"Liberalism versus Liberalism: An Analysis of Muslim-American Amicus Curiae Arguments Concerning Complicity-Based Conscience Claims"
775:
89:
2251:
2206:
623:
1524:
156:
is generally found in the cases where broad public interests are involved and concerns regarding civil rights are in question.
2086:
604:
362:
350:
270:
1387:
Panel Report, United States – Import Prohibition on Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/R/Corr.1 (3 November 1998),
1378:
Panel Report, United States – Import Prohibition on Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, WT/DS58/R/Corr.1 (3 November 1998)
431:
as they do not submit materials to the Court, do not need to ask for leave, and have no guarantee that they will be read.
1211:
607:(NGOs) are excluded and have no right to be heard. Thus the only way for them to contribute to a WTO decision is through
2091:
1263:
378:
286:
2152:
1953:
850:: Origin, Worldwide Experience and Suggestions for East European Countries", Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies (2019)
390:
1611:
1517:
302:
2096:
1963:
354:
227:
223:
2256:
946:
600:
358:
258:
231:
1237:
559:
509:
696:
2173:
1973:
1968:
1948:
1938:
1705:
1621:
781:
144:
by offering information, expertise, or insight that has a bearing on the issues in the case. Whether an
611:
briefs. To date there is a divergence in approaches in the WTO as to the admissibility of such briefs.
508:), and the judge is concerned that this will leave that party at a significant disadvantage and risk a
2218:
1999:
1799:
643:
briefs. This was deemed as the source of legal authority to accept such briefs by an Appellate Body.
1277:
2180:
1943:
1633:
1504:
395:
191:
400:
when thirty-two states under the aegis of Texas (and California independently) filed such briefs.
2261:
2101:
871:
845:
676:
195:
71:
35:
1138:"Should the Supreme Court Stop Inviting Amici Curiae to Defend Abandoned Lower Court Decisions?"
650:
briefs was EC – Asbestos, where the French government banned domestically produced and imported
483:
briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court. Muslim organizations and individuals, for example, have filed
476:
if neither party supports the decision of the lower court, which it has done at least 44 times.
1107:
1700:
1257:
1193:
1064:
919:
771:
739:
382:
250:
31:
716:
1183:
911:
903:
461:
333:. Appellate cases are normally limited to the factual record and arguments coming from the
1841:
1763:
1723:
1695:
1680:
1670:
1114:
326:
1491:
972:
1769:
1757:
1733:
1495:
627:
322:
897:
2245:
1847:
1628:
1509:
738:. Department of Justice Canada. Government of Canada. 3 February 2023. Archived from
420:
374:
219:
1835:
1829:
1823:
1811:
1793:
1728:
1690:
1675:
1657:
1050:"Ex Parte Blogging: The Legal Ethics of Supreme Court Advocacy in the Internet Era"
496:
411:
254:
176:
160:
148:
brief will be considered is typically under the court's discretion. The phrase is
1500:
2225:
2144:
1817:
1787:
1781:
1775:
1685:
1485:
579:
407:
334:
242:
149:
137:
1003:
2230:
1805:
1604:
915:
246:
1197:
1751:
1470:
505:
262:
215:
17:
907:
834:
Friends of the Supreme Court: Interest Groups and Judicial Decision Making
767:
Congressional Participation As Amicus Curiae Before the U.S. Supreme Court
697:"The Statement of Interest as a Tool in Federal Civil Rights Enforcement"
651:
330:
266:
1303:
1188:
1171:
875:
947:"Treccani - La cultura italiana | Treccani, il portale del sapere"
863:
464:) or mutual consent of the parties is generally required. Allowing an
419:, and other opinion pieces arguably have the capability to influence
184:
152:
and the origin of the term has been dated to 1605–1615. The scope of
238:", concludes that: "it is a figure of exclusive Anglo-Saxon blood".
614:
The first WTO case to comprehensively examine the admissibility of
472:
is considered "extraordinary". The court can also appoint its own
389:
when their laws or interests are likely to be affected, as in the
141:
809:
The Amicus Curiae: American Developments of English Institutions
416:
1513:
732:"Legal Representation of Children in Canada. 5. Amicus Curiae"
42:
1453:
1451:
1422:
1420:
570:
in the United States is known as an "intervener" in Canada.
58:
deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a
1019:"Thirty-four states support second amendment incorporation"
973:"Frenemies of the Court: The Many Faces of Amicus Curiae"
269:'s 2010 civil procedures code). Today, it is used by the
1356:(3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 263.
529:
is needed, the former counsel may be asked to remain as
899:
Amicus Curiae before International Courts and Tribunals
321:
The situation most often noted in the press is when an
67:
1596:
371:
National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws
241:
Starting in the 9th century, it was incorporated into
453:
format, and 40 copies must be served with the Court.
2110:
2071:
1982:
1929:
1857:
1742:
1714:
1644:
1587:
1547:
140:to a legal case, but that is permitted to assist a
1365:
1363:
1354:The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization
261:systems (it has been, as at 2013, integrated into
663:to create additional procedures to deal with the
136:) is an individual or organization that is not a
1212:"Chapter 7 – Managing the Unrepresented Accused"
1170:Bajwa, Kamran S.; Miller, Samuel E. (May 2023).
427:. They are not, however, technically considered
1505:The Free Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia
704:Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review
456:In the United States Supreme Court, unless the
385:of state laws. Hence states may file briefs as
311:
902:. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.
820:Edmund Ruffin Beckwith and Rudolf Sobernheim,
27:Latin legal term meaning "friend of the court"
1525:
8:
2158:Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court
313:I had always understood that the role of an
557:example, the complainant. As a result, the
210:Direct or indirect connections between the
111:
1532:
1518:
1510:
406:who do not file briefs may present in the
307:Allen v Sir Alfred McAlpine & Sons Ltd
1187:
770:. LFB Scholarly Publishing. p. 266.
764:Judithanne Scourfield McLauchlan (2005).
533:, given their familiarity with the case.
275:Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
90:Learn how and when to remove this message
1617:Cert. dismissed as improvidently granted
1216:Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General
301:was described by Lord Justice of Appeal
257:. From there, it was integrated in some
2140:Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937
2097:Old Supreme Court Chamber, U.S. Capitol
688:
661:Working Procedures for Appellate Review
646:The next significant case to deal with
626:of the WTO. This was overturned by the
1255:
283:Court of Justice of the European Union
56:The examples and perspective in this
1959:Eighth and Ninth Circuits Act of 1837
1004:"Amicus Curiae Constitucional.com.ar"
864:"The Amicus Curiae: Friends No More?"
249:systems. Later, it was introduced in
7:
512:, the judge may appoint a lawyer as
279:Inter-American Court of Human Rights
245:, and it was later extended to most
545:2022 ONSC 542, the judge appointed
367:American Center for Law and Justice
175:. In other jurisdictions, such as
127:
1541:Supreme Court of the United States
971:Anderson, Helen (1 January 2015).
868:Singapore Journal of Legal Studies
441:Supreme Court of the United States
325:files a brief in a case before an
74:, or create a new, as appropriate.
25:
1476:Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
977:University of Richmond Law Review
896:Wiik, Astrid (26 December 2018).
822:Amicus Curiae—Minister of Justice
536:Canadian courts may also appoint
2224:
2212:
2202:
2201:
2102:Old Senate Chamber, U.S. Capitol
1578:
1108:United States Supreme Court Rule
624:Dispute Settlement Understanding
479:Religious groups regularly file
47:
2189:United States Solicitor General
1916:Justices who served in Congress
1352:Van den Bossche, Peter (2013).
1244:. paras. 12-16. 24 January 2022
1002:Domingo Rondina (16 May 2012).
824:, 17 Fordham L. Rev. 38 (1948).
566:The role commonly described as
381:often hear cases involving the
2118:Article III, U.S. Constitution
1063:(6): 1535–1571. Archived from
935:– via library.oapen.org.
605:non-governmental organizations
591:World Trade Organization (WTO)
363:Electronic Frontier Foundation
351:American Civil Liberties Union
271:European Court of Human Rights
1:
2087:Royal Exchange, New York City
1969:Judicial Circuits Act of 1866
1369:Van den Bossche, 2013, p. 263
1238:"R. v. Warren, 2022 ONSC 542"
1048:Lee, Rachel C. (April 2009).
309:2 QB 229 at p. 266 F-G:
2135:Code of Conduct for Justices
1282:Department of Justice Canada
811:, in 16 ICLQ, 1967, 1017 ss.
504:for or refuses to apply for
287:Special Tribunal for Lebanon
2153:Impeachment of Samuel Chase
2092:Old City Hall, Philadelphia
1954:Seventh Circuit Act of 1807
1570:Nomination and confirmation
1176:Journal of Law and Religion
552:Another situation in which
435:United States Supreme Court
253:, in particular concerning
70:, discuss the issue on the
2278:
1576:
1136:Goldman, Brian P. (2011).
1089:Supreme Court Rule 37.3(a)
1017:Gura, Alan (7 July 2009).
862:Mohan, S. Chandra (2010).
798:, in 72 YLJ. 1962, 694 ss.
216:Roman juridical experience
200:amicus curiae observations
29:
2197:
1964:Tenth Circuit Act of 1863
1921:Burial places of justices
355:Landmark Legal Foundation
2219:United States portal
2163:Supreme Court in fiction
1262:: CS1 maint: location (
601:World Trade Organization
359:Pacific Legal Foundation
232:Law of the United States
30:Not to be confused with
2252:Latin legal terminology
1113:12 October 2016 at the
1098:Supreme Court Rule 37.6
796:The Amicus Curiae Brief
230:, and then also in the
194:, legal submissions by
2079:Supreme Court Building
1486:MSN Encarta Dictionary
654:products. Of the five
510:miscarriage of justice
443:has special rules for
319:
2174:United States Reports
2123:original jurisdiction
2007:Reporter of Decisions
1974:Judiciary Act of 1869
1949:Judiciary Act of 1802
1944:Judiciary Act of 1801
1939:Judiciary Act of 1789
1706:Ketanji Brown Jackson
1622:Grant, vacate, remand
1612:Cert. before judgment
908:10.5771/9783845275925
425:de facto amici curiae
404:De facto amici curiae
329:in which it is not a
226:first spread through
2000:Supreme Court Police
1565:Ideological leanings
1328:Corte costituzionale
345:In prominent cases,
192:international courts
2168:Supreme Court leaks
1634:In-chambers opinion
1189:10.1017/jlr.2023.12
1145:Stanford Law Review
1057:Stanford Law Review
742:on 24 November 2022
396:McDonald v. Chicago
121:friend of the court
1930:Statutes affecting
1872:Associate justices
1666:Associate justices
1560:Court demographics
1284:. 18 November 2016
916:20.500.12657/43984
885:– via JSTOR.
836:, Paul M. Collins.
677:Intervention (law)
265:'s law system and
36:Intervention (law)
2239:
2238:
1858:Lists of justices
1701:Amy Coney Barrett
1218:. 29 October 2015
925:978-3-8452-7592-5
383:constitutionality
251:international law
224:Latin legal terms
100:
99:
92:
32:Litigation friend
16:(Redirected from
2269:
2229:
2228:
2217:
2216:
2215:
2205:
2204:
2181:Lawyers' Edition
1716:Retired justices
1582:
1581:
1534:
1527:
1520:
1511:
1458:
1455:
1446:
1443:
1437:
1434:
1428:
1424:
1415:
1412:
1406:
1403:
1397:
1394:
1388:
1385:
1379:
1376:
1370:
1367:
1358:
1357:
1349:
1343:
1337:
1331:
1325:
1319:
1318:
1316:
1314:
1300:
1294:
1293:
1291:
1289:
1274:
1268:
1267:
1261:
1253:
1251:
1249:
1234:
1228:
1227:
1225:
1223:
1208:
1202:
1201:
1191:
1167:
1161:
1160:
1158:
1156:
1142:
1133:
1127:
1124:
1118:
1105:
1099:
1096:
1090:
1087:
1081:
1078:
1072:
1071:
1069:
1054:
1045:
1039:
1038:
1036:
1034:
1025:. Archived from
1014:
1008:
1007:
999:
993:
992:
990:
988:
968:
962:
961:
959:
957:
943:
937:
936:
934:
932:
893:
887:
886:
884:
882:
859:
853:
843:
837:
831:
825:
818:
812:
805:
799:
792:
786:
785:
780:. Archived from
761:
755:
754:
749:
747:
728:
722:
714:
708:
707:
701:
693:
462:motion for leave
129:
125:
122:
119:
116:
113:
95:
88:
84:
81:
75:
51:
50:
43:
21:
2277:
2276:
2272:
2271:
2270:
2268:
2267:
2266:
2257:Legal documents
2242:
2241:
2240:
2235:
2223:
2213:
2211:
2207:Other countries
2193:
2106:
2067:
1978:
1931:
1925:
1904:All nominations
1859:
1853:
1842:Rehnquist Court
1764:Ellsworth Court
1738:
1724:Anthony Kennedy
1710:
1696:Brett Kavanaugh
1681:Sonia Sotomayor
1671:Clarence Thomas
1645:Current members
1640:
1583:
1579:
1574:
1543:
1538:
1467:
1462:
1461:
1456:
1449:
1444:
1440:
1435:
1431:
1425:
1418:
1413:
1409:
1404:
1400:
1395:
1391:
1386:
1382:
1377:
1373:
1368:
1361:
1351:
1350:
1346:
1338:
1334:
1326:
1322:
1312:
1310:
1302:
1301:
1297:
1287:
1285:
1276:
1275:
1271:
1254:
1247:
1245:
1236:
1235:
1231:
1221:
1219:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1169:
1168:
1164:
1154:
1152:
1140:
1135:
1134:
1130:
1125:
1121:
1115:Wayback Machine
1106:
1102:
1097:
1093:
1088:
1084:
1079:
1075:
1070:on 21 May 2009.
1067:
1052:
1047:
1046:
1042:
1032:
1030:
1029:on 21 July 2012
1016:
1015:
1011:
1001:
1000:
996:
986:
984:
970:
969:
965:
955:
953:
951:www.treccani.it
945:
944:
940:
930:
928:
926:
895:
894:
890:
880:
878:
861:
860:
856:
844:
840:
832:
828:
819:
815:
806:
802:
793:
789:
784:on 17 May 2012.
778:
763:
762:
758:
745:
743:
730:
729:
725:
715:
711:
699:
695:
694:
690:
685:
673:
593:
576:
493:
437:
327:appellate court
297:The role of an
295:
222:, so that many
214:figure and the
208:
123:
120:
117:
114:
96:
85:
79:
76:
65:
52:
48:
39:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2275:
2273:
2265:
2264:
2259:
2254:
2244:
2243:
2237:
2236:
2234:
2233:
2231:Law portal
2221:
2209:
2198:
2195:
2194:
2192:
2191:
2186:
2185:
2184:
2170:
2165:
2160:
2155:
2150:
2142:
2137:
2132:
2127:
2126:
2125:
2114:
2112:
2108:
2107:
2105:
2104:
2099:
2094:
2089:
2082:
2081:
2075:
2073:
2069:
2068:
2066:
2065:
2064:
2063:
2058:
2053:
2048:
2043:
2038:
2033:
2028:
2023:
2009:
2004:
2003:
2002:
1992:
1986:
1984:
1980:
1979:
1977:
1976:
1971:
1966:
1961:
1956:
1951:
1946:
1941:
1935:
1933:
1927:
1926:
1924:
1923:
1918:
1913:
1912:
1911:
1901:
1900:
1899:
1897:time in office
1894:
1889:
1884:
1874:
1869:
1867:Chief justices
1863:
1861:
1855:
1854:
1852:
1851:
1850:(2005–present)
1845:
1839:
1833:
1827:
1821:
1815:
1809:
1803:
1797:
1791:
1785:
1779:
1773:
1770:Marshall Court
1767:
1761:
1758:Rutledge Court
1755:
1748:
1746:
1740:
1739:
1737:
1736:
1734:Stephen Breyer
1731:
1726:
1720:
1718:
1712:
1711:
1709:
1708:
1703:
1698:
1693:
1688:
1683:
1678:
1673:
1661:
1660:
1648:
1646:
1642:
1641:
1639:
1638:
1637:
1636:
1626:
1625:
1624:
1619:
1614:
1602:
1593:
1591:
1585:
1584:
1577:
1575:
1573:
1572:
1567:
1562:
1557:
1555:Lists of cases
1551:
1549:
1545:
1544:
1539:
1537:
1536:
1529:
1522:
1514:
1508:
1507:
1498:
1496:Dictionary.com
1489:
1479:
1466:
1465:External links
1463:
1460:
1459:
1447:
1438:
1429:
1416:
1407:
1398:
1389:
1380:
1371:
1359:
1344:
1332:
1320:
1295:
1269:
1229:
1203:
1182:(2): 224–248.
1162:
1128:
1119:
1100:
1091:
1082:
1073:
1040:
1023:ChicagoGunCase
1009:
994:
963:
938:
924:
888:
854:
838:
826:
813:
800:
787:
776:
756:
723:
720:, 2023 SCC 20.
709:
687:
686:
684:
681:
680:
679:
672:
669:
628:Appellate Body
599:briefs in the
592:
589:
575:
572:
492:
489:
436:
433:
379:federal courts
323:advocacy group
294:
291:
207:
204:
98:
97:
62:of the subject
60:worldwide view
55:
53:
46:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2274:
2263:
2260:
2258:
2255:
2253:
2250:
2249:
2247:
2232:
2227:
2222:
2220:
2210:
2208:
2200:
2199:
2196:
2190:
2187:
2183:
2182:
2178:
2177:
2176:
2175:
2171:
2169:
2166:
2164:
2161:
2159:
2156:
2154:
2151:
2149:
2147:
2143:
2141:
2138:
2136:
2133:
2131:
2130:Camera policy
2128:
2124:
2121:
2120:
2119:
2116:
2115:
2113:
2109:
2103:
2100:
2098:
2095:
2093:
2090:
2088:
2084:
2083:
2080:
2077:
2076:
2074:
2070:
2062:
2059:
2057:
2054:
2052:
2049:
2047:
2044:
2042:
2039:
2037:
2034:
2032:
2029:
2027:
2024:
2022:
2021:Chief Justice
2018:
2015:
2014:
2013:
2010:
2008:
2005:
2001:
1998:
1997:
1996:
1993:
1991:
1988:
1987:
1985:
1983:Functionaries
1981:
1975:
1972:
1970:
1967:
1965:
1962:
1960:
1957:
1955:
1952:
1950:
1947:
1945:
1942:
1940:
1937:
1936:
1934:
1928:
1922:
1919:
1917:
1914:
1910:
1907:
1906:
1905:
1902:
1898:
1895:
1893:
1890:
1888:
1885:
1883:
1880:
1879:
1878:
1875:
1873:
1870:
1868:
1865:
1864:
1862:
1856:
1849:
1848:Roberts Court
1846:
1843:
1840:
1837:
1834:
1831:
1828:
1825:
1822:
1819:
1816:
1813:
1810:
1807:
1804:
1801:
1798:
1795:
1792:
1789:
1786:
1783:
1780:
1777:
1774:
1771:
1768:
1765:
1762:
1759:
1756:
1753:
1750:
1749:
1747:
1745:
1741:
1735:
1732:
1730:
1727:
1725:
1722:
1721:
1719:
1717:
1713:
1707:
1704:
1702:
1699:
1697:
1694:
1692:
1689:
1687:
1684:
1682:
1679:
1677:
1674:
1672:
1669:
1667:
1663:
1662:
1659:
1656:
1654:
1653:Chief justice
1650:
1649:
1647:
1643:
1635:
1632:
1631:
1630:
1629:Shadow docket
1627:
1623:
1620:
1618:
1615:
1613:
1610:
1609:
1608:
1607:
1603:
1601:
1599:
1598:Amicus curiae
1595:
1594:
1592:
1590:
1586:
1571:
1568:
1566:
1563:
1561:
1558:
1556:
1553:
1552:
1550:
1546:
1542:
1535:
1530:
1528:
1523:
1521:
1516:
1515:
1512:
1506:
1502:
1501:Amicus curiae
1499:
1497:
1493:
1490:
1487:
1483:
1482:Amicus curiae
1480:
1478:
1477:
1472:
1471:Amicus curiae
1469:
1468:
1464:
1454:
1452:
1448:
1442:
1439:
1433:
1430:
1423:
1421:
1417:
1411:
1408:
1402:
1399:
1393:
1390:
1384:
1381:
1375:
1372:
1366:
1364:
1360:
1355:
1348:
1345:
1341:
1336:
1333:
1329:
1324:
1321:
1309:
1305:
1299:
1296:
1283:
1279:
1273:
1270:
1265:
1259:
1243:
1239:
1233:
1230:
1217:
1213:
1207:
1204:
1199:
1195:
1190:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1166:
1163:
1150:
1146:
1139:
1132:
1129:
1123:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1109:
1104:
1101:
1095:
1092:
1086:
1083:
1077:
1074:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1051:
1044:
1041:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1013:
1010:
1005:
998:
995:
982:
978:
974:
967:
964:
952:
948:
942:
939:
927:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
900:
892:
889:
877:
873:
869:
865:
858:
855:
851:
849:
848:Amicus Curiae
842:
839:
835:
830:
827:
823:
817:
814:
810:
804:
801:
797:
794:Krislov, S.,
791:
788:
783:
779:
777:1-59332-088-4
773:
769:
768:
760:
757:
753:
741:
737:
736:justice.gc.ca
733:
727:
724:
721:
719:
713:
710:
705:
698:
692:
689:
682:
678:
675:
674:
670:
668:
666:
665:amicus curiae
662:
657:
656:amicus curiae
653:
649:
648:amicus curiae
644:
642:
641:amicus curiae
637:
636:amicus curiae
631:
629:
625:
621:
620:amicus curiae
617:
616:amicus curiae
612:
610:
609:amicus curiae
606:
602:
598:
597:amicus curiae
590:
588:
585:
581:
573:
571:
569:
568:amicus curiae
564:
562:
561:
560:Criminal Code
555:
550:
548:
544:
543:R. v. Warren,
539:
534:
532:
528:
523:
519:
515:
514:amicus curiae
511:
507:
502:
501:amicus curiae
498:
490:
488:
486:
482:
477:
475:
474:amicus curiae
471:
470:oral argument
467:
466:amicus curiae
463:
459:
454:
451:
446:
445:amicus curiae
442:
434:
432:
430:
429:amici curiae,
426:
423:decisions as
422:
421:Supreme Court
418:
413:
409:
405:
401:
399:
397:
392:
391:Supreme Court
388:
384:
380:
376:
375:United States
372:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
343:
340:
339:amicus curiae
336:
332:
328:
324:
318:
316:
315:amicus curiae
310:
308:
304:
300:
292:
290:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
239:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
213:
212:amicus curiae
205:
203:
201:
197:
193:
188:
186:
182:
181:amicus curiae
178:
174:
172:
166:
165:amicus curiae
162:
157:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
135:
134:
109:
108:
107:amicus curiae
102:
94:
91:
83:
73:
69:
68:improve this
63:
61:
54:
45:
44:
41:
37:
33:
19:
2179:
2172:
2145:
1909:unsuccessful
1877:All justices
1860:and nominees
1836:Burger Court
1830:Warren Court
1824:Vinson Court
1812:Hughes Court
1794:Fuller Court
1729:David Souter
1691:Neil Gorsuch
1676:Samuel Alito
1664:
1658:John Roberts
1651:
1605:
1597:
1488:(2009-10-31)
1474:
1441:
1432:
1410:
1401:
1392:
1383:
1374:
1353:
1347:
1335:
1323:
1311:. Retrieved
1307:
1304:"Intervener"
1298:
1286:. Retrieved
1281:
1272:
1246:. Retrieved
1241:
1232:
1220:. Retrieved
1215:
1206:
1179:
1175:
1165:
1153:. Retrieved
1148:
1144:
1131:
1122:
1103:
1094:
1085:
1076:
1065:the original
1060:
1056:
1043:
1031:. Retrieved
1027:the original
1022:
1012:
997:
985:. Retrieved
980:
976:
966:
954:. Retrieved
950:
941:
929:. Retrieved
898:
891:
879:. Retrieved
867:
857:
847:
841:
833:
829:
821:
816:
808:
807:Angell, E.,
803:
795:
790:
782:the original
766:
759:
751:
744:. Retrieved
740:the original
735:
726:
717:
712:
703:
691:
664:
660:
655:
647:
645:
640:
635:
632:
619:
615:
613:
608:
596:
595:The role of
594:
584:amici curiae
583:
577:
567:
565:
558:
553:
551:
546:
542:
537:
535:
530:
526:
521:
517:
513:
500:
497:Canadian law
494:
484:
480:
478:
473:
465:
457:
455:
449:
444:
438:
428:
424:
412:social media
403:
402:
394:
387:amici curiae
386:
347:amici curiae
346:
344:
338:
320:
314:
312:
306:
303:Cyril Salmon
298:
296:
293:Presentation
255:human rights
240:
236:consiliarius
235:
211:
209:
199:
189:
180:
170:
169:
164:
161:American law
158:
154:amici curiae
153:
145:
133:amici curiae
132:
131:
106:
105:
103:
101:
86:
77:
57:
40:
18:Amici curiae
1844:(1986–2005)
1838:(1969–1986)
1832:(1953–1969)
1826:(1946–1953)
1820:(1941–1946)
1818:Stone Court
1814:(1930–1941)
1808:(1921–1930)
1802:(1910–1921)
1800:White Court
1796:(1888–1910)
1790:(1874–1888)
1788:Waite Court
1784:(1864–1873)
1782:Chase Court
1778:(1836–1864)
1776:Taney Court
1772:(1801–1835)
1766:(1796–1800)
1754:(1789–1795)
1686:Elena Kagan
1492:Definitions
1080:Rule 37(1).
987:26 December
956:26 December
931:26 December
881:26 December
870:: 352–374.
580:Italian law
468:to present
408:print media
335:lower court
243:English law
228:English law
198:are called
196:intervenors
150:legal Latin
2246:Categories
1932:court size
1806:Taft Court
1606:Certiorari
1589:Procedures
718:R v Kahsai
683:References
247:common law
80:March 2020
2262:Roman law
2012:Law clerk
1887:education
1752:Jay Court
1548:The court
1308:Irwin Law
1198:0748-0814
1151:: 907–972
1033:4 October
506:legal aid
263:Argentina
259:civil law
72:talk page
2085:Former:
2072:Location
1258:cite web
1155:25 April
1126:FRAP 29.
1111:Archived
876:24870502
671:See also
652:asbestos
331:litigant
285:and the
267:Honduras
66:You may
2146:Lochner
2111:Related
2061:Seat 10
1995:Marshal
1744:History
1484:at the
1473:at the
746:21 June
369:or the
206:History
115:
2056:Seat 9
2051:Seat 8
2046:Seat 6
2041:Seat 4
2036:Seat 3
2031:Seat 2
2026:Seat 1
1760:(1795)
1313:28 May
1288:11 May
1248:28 May
1242:CanLII
1222:11 May
1196:
922:
874:
774:
554:amicus
547:amicus
531:amicus
527:amicus
522:amicus
518:amicus
491:Canada
485:amicus
481:amicus
458:amicus
450:amicus
365:, the
361:, the
357:, the
353:, the
299:amicus
281:, the
277:, the
273:, the
185:lawyer
177:Canada
171:amicus
146:amicus
130:
2017:lists
1990:Clerk
1882:court
1600:brief
1494:from
1141:(PDF)
1068:(PDF)
1053:(PDF)
983:: 361
872:JSTOR
700:(PDF)
574:Italy
538:amici
499:, an
417:blogs
393:case
220:Latin
183:is a
179:, an
173:brief
163:, an
142:court
138:party
1892:seat
1315:2024
1290:2020
1264:link
1250:2024
1224:2020
1194:ISSN
1157:2017
1117:, 33
1035:2009
989:2022
958:2022
933:2022
920:ISBN
883:2022
772:ISBN
748:2023
439:The
410:and
112:lit.
2148:era
1503:at
1340:AIC
1184:doi
912:hdl
904:doi
578:In
495:In
305:in
190:In
168:an
159:In
128:pl.
104:An
34:or
2248::
2019::
1450:^
1419:^
1362:^
1306:.
1280:.
1260:}}
1256:{{
1240:.
1214:.
1192:.
1180:38
1178:.
1174:.
1149:63
1147:.
1143:.
1061:61
1059:.
1055:.
1021:.
981:49
979:.
975:.
949:.
918:.
910:.
866:.
750:.
734:.
702:.
582:,
377:,
289:.
202:.
126:;
1668::
1655::
1533:e
1526:t
1519:v
1427:-
1342:.
1330:.
1317:.
1292:.
1266:)
1252:.
1226:.
1200:.
1186::
1159:.
1037:.
1006:.
991:.
960:.
914::
906::
852:.
846:"
706:.
398:,
124:'
118:'
110:(
93:)
87:(
82:)
78:(
64:.
38:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.