AMICUS ADVOCACY PROJECT
The Amicus Advocacy Project
An amicus brief comes from the Latin term “amicus curiae” which means “friend of the court.” Although most amicus briefs are persuasively written to support one side of a case, they allow interested, third parties the chance to provide the court with information that is relevant and helpful to the case but that may not otherwise be brought to the court’s attention.
CHILD USA files amicus briefing in cases whose outcomes impact the civil rights of children. We have been delighted to work with numerous attorneys across the United States, and welcome partnerships with law firms to work on pro bono matters with us.
If you are an attorney who needs amicus support or would like your firm to have the opportunity to work on cutting edge amicus briefs involving child protection, please contact us at info@childusa.org.
BRIEFS
John Doe #1 and John Doe #2 v. Twitter Inc.
CHILD USA submitted this brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees arguing that Twitter knowingly operated as a distributor in the modern Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) marketplace and that they should not be immune from liability under the Communications Decency Act (CDA) Section 230. ...
Hotchalk, Inc. v. Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, et al.
CHILD USA together with the Oregon Trial Lawyers Association, Zero Abuse Project, Oregon Abuse Advocates & Survivors in Service, National Crime Victim Law Institute, and The National Center for Victims of Crime submitted this amicus brief urging the Court to deny Defendants' veiled request for...
Rick Jackman, Linda Thompson, and Louisville/Jeff v. Samantha Killary, et al.
CHILD USA wrote this brief urging the Supreme Court of Kentucky to uphold the constitutionality of the state's revival window for child sexual abuse claims. CHILD USA educates the court on the science of trauma that can impact disclosure, the public policy interests served through revival of civil...
Bernard Musumeci v. State of New York
CHILD USA wrote this brief denouncing a Court of Claims decision that dismissed Plaintiff's CVA claims for failing to plead with specificity each incident of abuse among other things. CHILD USA explains why the Court of Claims decision is inconsistent with the science of trauma and how such a...
Aurora Public Schools and David James O’Neill v. Angelica Saupe and Brian Saupe
CHILD USA wrote this amicus brief in response to a constitutional challenge to the CSAAA revival provision. CHILD USA asks the court to uphold the constitutionality of the CSAAA and walks the court through its legislative history, educates the court on the trauma of abuse and its impact on...
Fleming v. Amateur Athletic Union of the United States, Inc.
CHILD USA filed this brief in the Wisconsin Supreme Court in support of Plaintiff-Appellant. Here, CHILD USA considers the legislative history and historical context for Wisconsin's 2003 SOL extension law to support the lower court's ruling that the SOL extension applies to victims of abuse in...
Doe v. Ariz. Bd. of Regents, et al.
CHILD USA filed this brief support of Plaintiff's appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. Here, CHILD USA argues that neither Arizona's Window Legislation nor the Notice Statute require victims of child sexual abuse with revived claims against public entities to comply with a renewed notice of claim...
Spencer Elden v. Nirvana, L.L.C., et al.
CHILD USA filed this brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in support of plaintiff-appellant's appeal for reversal of the District Court's dismissal. Here, CHILD USA argues that the District Court's interpretation of Masha's Law is not consistent with the nature of the...
Gonzalez, et al. v. Google LLC
CHILD USA filed this brief in support of petitioners' appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. Here, CHILD USA argues that this Court should interpret Section 230 consistent with its text and child safety purpose to avoid further injustice and to give victims an avenue for meaningful...