Source: https://www.rcfp.org/privilege-sections/6-amicus-briefs/
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 20:27:41+00:00

Document:
Amicus briefs are permitted on appeal.
Amicus briefs are not routinely filed but may be accepted by the courts if they are relevant. The relevancy of a particular amicus brief is determined on a case-by-case basis. “The United States or its officer or agency, or a state may file an amicus-curiae brief without the consent of the parties or leave of court. Any other amicus curiae may file a brief only by leave of court or if the brief states that all parties have consented to its filing.” Fed. R. App. Proc. 29(a). See also 1st Cir. Local Rule 29 (a)(2).
The First Circuit requires a party seeking to submit an amicus brief to file a motion, accompanied by the proposed brief, which sets forth his interest in the matter, the reason why an amicus brief is desirable and why the matters asserted are relevant to the disposition of the case. The motion must be filed no later than 7 days after the principal brief of the party being supported is filed, or, if neither side is being supported, no later than 7 days after the appellant’s or petitioner’s principal brief is filed. (Fed. R. App. Proc. 29(a)(6)). See also 1st Cir. Local Rule 29(a).
The filing of amicus briefs is governed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29, which permits an amicus to submit a brief by leave of court or if the brief states that all parties have consented to its filing. The Court of Appeals of the Fourth Circuit appears to accept amicus briefs as a routine matter; they are also often accepted at the district court level, such as in Food Lion, where the court was reviewing the orders of a magistrate judge.
The Fifth Circuit may accept amicus briefs. 5th Cir. L.R. 29, 31.2. In Selcraig, the court responded specifically to the assertions made by the amicus curiae regarding the reporter's privilege. In re Selcraig, 705 F.2d 789, 795 (5th Cir. 1983). Those wishing to file an amicus brief in the Fifth Circuit must file a motion within seven days after the filing of the principal brief whose position the amicus brief will support. 5th Cir. L.R. 29(a)(6). Similarly, in some instances amicus briefs may be filed in district courts with the permission of the presiding judge. See, e.g., N.D. Tex. L.R. 7.2(b).
United States District Courts within the Sixth Circuit will sometimes accept amicus briefs. The Sixth Circuit itself usually accepts them. Amicus briefs submitted to District Courts opposing reporter' subpoenas are rare.
There are no special rules regarding amicus briefs and motions to quash subpoenas.
Courts in the Seventh Circuit employ a “relative hardship” standard in determining whether to quash a subpoena. Beverly v. Watson, No. 14-cv-4970, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87725, *18 (N.D. Ill. July 7, 2016) (Finnegan, Mag.) (standard is “relative hardship” or whether burden of production would outweigh benefit); Wilson v. O'Brien, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22967, *19, 2009 WL 763785 (“reasonable under the circumstances”); Mosely v. City of Chicago, 252 F.R.D. 421, 427 (N.D. Ill. 2008) (in Seventh Circuit, subpoenas directed to journalists and media, like those to any non-party, need only be "reasonable in the circumstances”). A subpoenaing party seeking to compel the disclosure of information from a journalist gathered in the course of newsgathering must show that the evidence is highly probative of issues relevant to the case and that it does not have the evidence, or it is otherwise unavailable to them. Bond v. Utreras, No. 04 C 2617, 2006 WL 1806387 at *6, (N.D. Ill. June 27, 2006). In Patterson v. Burge, No. 03 C 4433, 2005 WL 43240 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 6, 2005), the court held the party enforcing a subpoena must showing materiality and that they do not have the information sought and it is not available from other sources. Id. at *2 - *3. See also Neal v. City of Harvey, Ill., 173 F.R.D. 231, 233 (N.D. Ill. 1993) (subpoenaing party must show: "(1) that the information is not available from a non-journalistic source; and (2) that it is highly relevant and material to the case at bar."). See Builders Assoc. of Greater Chicago v. County of Cook, No. 96 C 1121, 1998 WL 111702, at *5 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 12, 1998).
The Ninth Circuit routinely accepts amicus briefs. In In re Grand Jury Proceedings (Scarce v. United States), the Ninth Circuit accepted an amicus brief from the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Washington. 5 F.3d 397 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1041 (1994). In Shoen II, briefs were accepted by the Ninth Circuit on behalf of amici Arizona Newspapers Association; Radio-Television News Directors Association; and Association of American Publishers. Shoen II, 48 F.3d at 416. Likewise, in In re Grand Jury Subpoena (Wolf v. United States), 201 Fed. App’x 430 (9th Cir. 2006), the Ninth Circuit accepted and addressed amici’s arguments in favor of applying a constitutional and common-law reporter’s privilege in that case. See id. at 433. The district court in In re Grand Jury Subpoenas to Fainaru-Wada & Williams, 438 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (N.D. Cal. 2006), also considered an amicus brief filed on behalf of the journalists in that case. Id. at 1112 n.1.
Alabama courts routinely accept amicus briefs, although they are more prevalent at the appellate than at the trial court level. There is no particular organization that regularly files amicus briefs opposing the subpoenaing of reporters in Alabama. Parites can contact the Alabama Press Association in Birmingham for support at (205) 871-7737.
Amicus briefs are routinely accepted by the courts, although they are rarely filed at the trial court level. If a subpoena issue were to be presented to an appellate court as a point on appeal, it is possible that the Alaska Press Club, the Alaska Newspaper Association, or another press organization might wish to file an amicus brief. It is very unlikely that a press organization, other than one directly involved as the recipient of a subpoena or employer of the recipient, would become involved as an amicus at the trial court level for a number of reasons, primarily including the expense of doing so, the lack of precedential value of a superior court ruling, and the multiplicity of non-related issues.
Amicus briefs are commonly accepted by Arizona's appellate courts, and the procedure for seeking leave to file an amicus brief is set forth in Ariz. R. Civ. App. P. 16. No Arizona organizations regularly file amicus briefs opposing media subpoenas.
Amicus curiae briefs are allowed in appeals to the Arkansas Supreme Court and the Arkansas Court of Appeals with the permission of the respective court. Rules of Ark. Sup. Ct. and Ct. App. 4-6. Motions requesting permission should state the reasons why the brief is necessary. Id. Amici attorneys are not allowed to present oral arguments, nor are they allowed to petition for rehearings in their own names. Id. Briefs supporting the appellant's position or which are neutral are due when the appellant's brief is due; those supporting the appellee's position are due when the appellee's brief is due. It is customary to file the motion for leave to file an amicus brief when the amicus brief is filed.
Amicus briefs typically are not filed in California’s Superior Courts, although no law prevents amicus support at that level, and trial courts usually will accept such briefs for filing. They routinely are accepted in matters pending before the Courts of Appeal and the Supreme Court. California Rules of Court 8.200, 8.500(g) and 8.520(f) provide the procedure for submitting an amicus brief.
Three organizations in California regularly serve as amici on reporter’s privilege issues. The First Amendment Coalition can be reached at firstamendmentcoalition.org. FAC’s address is 534 Fourth Street, Suite B, San Rafael, California 94901, and its telephone number is (415) 460-5060. CalAware can be reached at calaware.org. Its address is 2218 Homewood Way, Carmichael, California 95608, and its telephone number is (916) 487-7000. The California Newspapers Publishers Association can be reached at cnpa.com. CNPA’s address is 2701 K Street, Sacramento, California 95816, and its telephone number is (916) 288-6000.
Amicus briefs are permitted at the appellate level. There is no prohibition against submitting an amicus brief to the trial court; however, filing an amicus brief at the trial court level is unusual.
There are media organizations in Colorado that would support an amicus brief opposing the subpoenaing of a newsperson. They include the Colorado Press Association, 303-571-5117; and the individual newspapers, television stations and radio stations throughout the state.
Amicus briefs are generally rare at the trial court level, but more common in the Appellate and Supreme Courts.
No statutory or case law addressing this issue exists. However, Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and D.C. Circuit Rule 29 address motions for leave to file amicus briefs.
Amicus briefs are rarely filed in courts other than the Delaware Supreme Court.
Pursuant to Rule 29(a) of the Rules of the D.C. Court of Appeals, a brief of an amicus curiae may be filed only with leave of court or if accompanied by written consent of all parties. The motion for leave must be accompanied by the proposed brief, identify the interests of the applicant, and state the reasons why a brief of an amicus curiae is desirable and why the matters asserted are relevant to the disposition of the case.
Florida courts at all levels accept amicus briefs. Potential amici in reporter's privilege cases include the Florida First Amendment Foundation (317 E. Park Ave., Suite 101, Tallahassee, Florida 32301; Phone: 800-337-3518 or 850-222-3518) and the Florida Press Association (336 E. College Ave., Suite 201, Tallahassee, FL 32308; Phone: 850-283-5255).
Georgia's trial and appellate courts accept amicus briefs. See generally Georgia Supreme Court Rule 23; Georgia Court of Appeals Rule 25.
State organizations that regularly oppose the issuance of subpoenas to reporters include the Georgia Press Association (http://gapress.org/) and the Georgia First Amendment Foundation (http://gfaf.org/).
Amicus briefs are routinely accepted by the Hawai'i Supreme Court and Intermediate Court of Appeals. Typically, amicus briefs are limited to 10 pages.
Amici appearances in Idaho appellate courts are governed by Rule 8 of the Idaho Appellate Rules, by which the appeal court may allow an amicus in its direction. There is no similar rule in the trial court rules, but amici appearances are nonetheless allowed upon motion in some instances. Ordinarily, the court--whether at the trial level or at the appellate level--is asked to grant express permission to file an amicus brief. In that request, the potential amicus should make out a substantive case for the purpose of an amicus brief, the nature of the position to be taken by the amicus in the case and the time period sought for the purpose of completing and filing such a brief.
Amicus briefs may be filed only by leave of the court, or at the courts request. Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 345(a). Illinois Supreme Court Rules 341-344 set forth the rules for the format and appearance of amicus briefs. Amicus curiae are not allowed time for oral argument. Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 345(c).
Amicus briefs are accepted at the appellate level. For rules relating to amicus participation, see Ind. R. App. P. 16, 41, 43, 44, 46, 53; see also In re Indiana Newspapers Inc., 963 N.E.2d 534, 536 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (amicus briefs filed in shield law case).
Amicus participation is unusual in Iowa district courts but would probably be allowed. State court rules do not directly address such participation.
Amicus participation at the appellate level is allowed provided that the amici serves and files its brief within the time allowed the party whose position as to affirmance or reversal the brief will support. Iowa R. App. P. 6.906.
Organizations from whom the Court likely would accept such briefs include: Iowa Freedom of Information Council; Iowa Newspaper Association; Iowa Broadcasters Association; Iowa Broadcast News Association; local SDX/SPJ Chapters; and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
Appellate courts routinely accept amicus briefs. They are filed infrequently at the trial level, as a result of which it is impossible to say whether they are “routinely” accepted.
Amicus briefs are rarely filed at the trial court level and there is no procedure for doing so. At the appellate level, they may be filed at the discretion of the court. In the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, an amicus brief must be tendered with a motion for leave to file the brief and filing fee no later than 15 days after the appellant’s brief is filed. Ky. R. Civ. P. 76.12(7).
All levels of courts can accept amicus briefs, but it is extremely rare at the district court level. At the appellate level, the Louisiana Press Association is most likely to file or join an amicus brief in support of a reporter's privilege being invoked. Will Chapman is executive director and Mike Rood is general manager, and can be reached at 404 Europa Street, Baton Rouge, LA 70802, 225-344-9309.
The trial court has discretion to accept amicus briefs, although such briefs are very rare at the trial level in Maine. The Maine Supreme Court generally accepts amicus briefs; it allowed a half dozen broadcasters and publishers to appear by amicus brief in In re Letellier, 578 A.2d 722, 17 Med.L.Rptr. 2169 (Me. 1990).
There is no rule or case law either permitting or prohibiting the filing of amicus briefs at the district or circuit court levels.
Amicus briefs are explicitly permitted at the appellate level -- Md. R. App. Rev., Ct. App. & Ct. Special App. 8-511(a) -- An amicus brief may be filed with written consent of all parties to the appeal; by the Attorney General in any appeal in which the State has an interest; upon request by the court; or upon the court’s grant of a motion filed pursuant to section (b) of this Rule.
For rules relating to amicus briefs, see Mass. R. App. P. 17.
Amicus participation is unusual in Minnesota district courts. State court rules do not directly address such participation.
At the appellate level, amicus participation is routinely approved, following application for leave to participate under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 129 (requests for leave generally must be filed within fifteen days after the filing of the notice of appeal).
Amici in cases involving the reporters' privilege have included individual news organizations, the Society of Professional Journalists (www.mnspj.org), the Minnesota Newspaper Association (www.mnnewspapernet.org), and the Minnesota Broadcasters Association (www.minnesotabroadcasters.com).
A brief of an amicus curiae may be filed only by leave of the appropriate appellate court, except that leave shall not be required when the brief is presented by the state and sponsored by the Attorney General or by a guardian ad litem who is not otherwise a party to the appeal. A motion for leave shall demonstrate that (1) amicus has an interest in some other case involving a similar question; or (2) counsel for a party is inadequate or the brief insufficient; or (3) there are matters of fact or law that may otherwise escape the court's attention; or (4) the amicus has substantial legitimate interests that will likely be affected by the outcome of the case and which interests will not be adequately protected by those already parties to the case.
(b) How and When Filed.
A motion for leave to file an amicus brief shall be filed no later than seven (7) days after filing of the initial brief of the party whose position the amicus brief will support. The motion must be accompanied by the proposed brief of amicus curiae which shall be a concise statement not to exceed 15 pages. The party filing the motion shall also file with the motion a brief stating why the motion satisfies the requirements of Rule 29(a).
An opposing party who does not object to the motion for leave may respond to the amicus brief in the opposing party's response or reply brief pursuant to Rule 28(c) or 28(d). An opposing party who objects to the motion for leave shall file a response in opposition within seven (7) days pursuant to Rule 27 stating why the requirements of Rule 29(a) have not been met. For the purpose of Rule 31(a), the time for filing the next brief will run from the date the appropriate court enters an order on the motion for leave.
A motion of amicus curiae to participate in oral argument will be granted only for extraordinary reasons.
There are no organizations that regularly file amicus briefs opposing the subpoenaing of reporters.
Courts often accept amicus briefs. In Montana a reporter may wish to contact the FOI Hotline c/o the Associated Press Bureau in Helena, Montana.
Whether to allow for the filing of amicus briefs and the time for submitting such briefs is within the discretion of the court.
Nevada courts routinely accept amicus briefs in the district courts and Nevada Supreme Court. Barry Smith, Director of the Nevada Press Association can be contacted at 702-885-0866. The Nevada Press Association is located at 102 N. Curry St., Carson City, Nevada 89703; fax number: 775-885-0866. The Reporters Committee can be contacted at 800.336.4243 or hotline -at- rcfp.org.
The Court regularly accepts amicus briefs and has done so in cases involving the media. See, e.g., Keene Pub. Corp. v. Keene District Court, 117 N.H. 959 (1977). A person or entity seeking to file an amicus brief must comply with Supreme Court Rule 30.
Amicus briefs are not generally submitted at the trial level although they are permitted. An amicus can ask to be heard at any level. R.1:13-9.
New Mexico appellate courts routinely accept amicus briefs, but the practice is far less common at the district-court level. In the past, the New Mexico Press Association (P.O. Box 95198, Albuquerque, N.M. 87199; 505-275-1241) and the New Mexico Broadcasters Association (2333 Wisconsin St. NE, Albuquerque, N.M. 87110; 505-881-4444) have occasionally weighed in with amicus briefs on issues of concern to the press.
Amicus briefs are routinely accepted, but rarely filed.
Amicus briefs are typically not filed at the trial court level but are allowed at the appellate level.
Amicus briefs are not typically filed in Oregon trial courts, but may be in Oregon's appellate courts, pursuant to Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 8.15. Statewide interested parties include the Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association (contact information at http://orenews.com), and the Oregon Association of Broadcasters (contact information at https://www.theoab.org).
There is no Pennsylvania civil or criminal rule of procedure concerning the filing of amici curiae briefs at the trial court level. Counsel should consult the local rules for any limitations.
Pennsylvania appellate courts generally accept amicus briefs. Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 531 provides that any non-party may submit an amicus curiae brief, without permission of the court, by the deadline for submission of the brief by the party whose position the amicus curiae supports. Oral argument by amici is by permission only. Pa. R. App. P. 531(b).
For possible amicus curiae support, the news media should contact the Reporters Committee (800.336.4243) and Melissa Melewsky, Media Law Counsel, Pennsylvania NewsMedia Association, 3899 North Front Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110; (717) 703-3048.
Amicus briefs are rare but not unknown at the trial court level. Rule 213 of the South Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure describes the mechanism for seeking leave of the court to file an amicus brief. In the only appellate case involving the South Carolina shield law an amici brief was filed on behalf of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the South Carolina Press Association. The most likely organization to petition for leave to participate as an amicus is the South Carolina Press Association, P.O. Box 11429, Columbia, S.C. 29211, 803/750-9561.
This is certainly an option, but it will depend upon the judge.
Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 31 outlines the procedures for filing amicus curiae briefs in the appellate courts. There is no established procedure for amicus briefs in the trial courts.
Texas courts will accept amicus briefs from interested media organizations. One can anticipate the Texas District and County Attorneys Association would oppose a broad interpretation of the statute.
There is no general rule regarding the acceptance of amicus briefs in cases involving reporter's privilege issues, although at least some trial judges have been amenable to amicus participation. Two groups that have previously been involved in such cases as amici are the Utah Headliners Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists and the Utah Press Association.
Vermont superior courts do not routinely accept amicus briefs. An amicus brief in the Vermont Supreme Court may be filed only if accompanied by the written consent of all parties, or by leave of the trial court granted on motion, or at the request of the Supreme Court. See V.R.A.P. 29. The motion for leave to file the amicus brief must identify the interest of the applicant and state the reasons why the brief would be desirable. See id.
For rules relating to amicus participation, see Rules 5A:23 and 5:30 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia.
Washington appellate courts provide expressly for amicus briefs. RAP 10.6. The trial courts have no comparable provisions, but in the authors' experience the state's trial judges have permitted amicus briefs.
Briefs of amicus curiae often are accepted by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.
Courts in Wyoming do accept amicus briefs. However, we have no known history regarding amicus briefs opposing the subpoenaing reporters.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.