TikTok v. Garland
December 23, 2024
Advancing American Freedom filed an amicus brief with over 20 other amici arguing that the legislation to force TikTok to divest from the Chinese Communist Party is a matter of national security and should be upheld for the security of the American people.
“TikTok is digital fentanyl, a 21st-century technological weapon being used by the Chinese Communist Party to target the American people,” said Vice President Pence. “Our government’s first job is to defend our Nation and its citizens. The Supreme Court should uphold the law forcing the sale of TikTok to protect the security and privacy of the American people.”
“In a rare show of bipartisanship, Congress passed this legislation recognizing that TikTok is a national security threat while under the control of the Chinese Communist Party,” said AAF President Tim Chapman. “America must show strength in the face of China’s growing threat and uphold this legislation to defend our nation’s security.”
“The Constitution empowers Congress to defend our nation against threats from adversaries,” J. Marc Wheat, AAF General Counsel. “The First Amendment is not an open door to our adversaries, and there is no First Amendment that applies to the Chinese Communist Party. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit already upheld this legislation under the highest level of scrutiny, and the Supreme Court must uphold it as well to protect the American people.”
Read the full brief here.
Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland
Advancing American Freedom led a coalition of 19 other amici fighting federal overreach and for the freedom of American’s information from the prying eyes of government. In Texas Top Cop Shop v. Garland, Texas Top Cop Shop is challenging the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), a law that requires tens of millions of organizations, from small businesses to political organizations, to report “Beneficial Owner Information” to the government. This law is not justified by any of Congress’s enumerated powers and thus is unconstitutional. It also requires gathering of massive amounts of private information in a government database that invites hacking.
“The Constitution is not a blank check,” said AAF General Counsel J. Marc Wheat. “It is a limited delegation of specific powers. None of those powers justifies the collection of broad swaths of information about the American people. The law at issue in this case does exactly that and must be struck down. Its enforcement should be stayed until the courts have time to consider it fully.”
Read the full brief here.
Advancing American Freedom led a coalition of 31 other amici defending the right of students in an Ohio school district to tell the truth in their use of some of the most fundamental elements of language: pronouns. Olentangy School District (which objected to the Court reading our amicus brief) has a set of policies that, taken together, prohibit students from using sex-accurate pronouns that correspond with reality when doing so might cause offense to another student. Whether in the form of secret social transitioning, chemical or surgical mutilation of healthy children, or forcing kids to lie about what is right in front of them, the Left has no business imposing onto children their absurd theories about language and human sexuality.
“Rather than focusing on improving students’ understanding of the great truths contained in subjects like history, literature, math, and science, education officials around the country are spending their time devising ways to impose their novel social theories onto children,” said AAF General Counsel J. Marc Wheat. “It’s time for courts to intervene and put a stop to these absurd policies before more children are harmed. Our schools must rededicate themselves to truth rather than continue to be distracted by fanciful and ephemeral falsehoods.”
Read the full brief here.
Mcnutt v. DOJ
Advancing American Freedom led a coalition of 19 other amici fighting against federal overreach in the form of an unconstitutional statute. McNutt v. Department of Justice is a challenge to federal statutory law that bans at-home distillation of spirits. Every law passed by Congress must be a legitimate exercise of one of its limited enumerated powers. After losing in the district court, the government is arguing in the Fifth Circuit that this ban is necessary as a means of enforcing its tax on the distillation of spirits. If the courts were to accept this argument, the Federal Government would be able to regulate any productive activity as long as the government could make the argument that without the regulation, people might evade the tax. Such a power would be totally contrary to the limited government created by the Constitution.
“Whether through the Commerce Clause or, here, through the Taxing Power, or otherwise, the Federal Government is constantly looking for ways to usurp the reserved power of the States and the people,” said AAF General Counsel J. Marc Wheat. “This expansion of power, now exercised in large part by unaccountable bureaucrats in the administrative state, must be reversed if we are to have a ‘government of laws and not of men.’”
Read the full brief here.
SAMHSA’s “Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request” for the Zero Suicide in Health Systems project evaluation states that “while acknowledging the lack of evidence for cultural adaptations to evidence-based and empirically supported treatments and interventions, and that research has not been conducted with historically marginalized and underserved communities (e.g., Black, Asian, Autistic, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex plus (LGBTQI+), and others), Zero Suicide pushes systems to ensure that clients’ cultural contexts are considered and honored in what treatments are offered and how those treatments are adapted.” The notice goes on to say that “with behavioral health equity as a central component woven throughout the Zero Suicide Framework, the proposed evaluation will ensure that each study includes specific behavioral health equity tenets to ensure a culturally specific understanding of Zero Suicide implementation, outcomes, and impacts.” AAF is deeply concerned that SAMHSA is taking an ideologically driven approach to suicide prevention. Suicide prevention efforts should not be conflated with the rejected Biden-Harris DEI agenda.
Advancing American Freedom led a coalition of 27 other amici in Lemelson v. SEC fighting against the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) abuse of power in refusing to pay the legal fees of Father Emanuel Lemelson.
After a decade of litigation against a Greek Orthodox priest, the SEC failed to convince a jury of most of its charges against him. If the SEC wins this case, it will reward the SEC strategy of punishing those it does not like by giving targets who assert their innocence an offer they can’t refuse: a massive settlement or overwhelming legal bills.
“While the jury denied the SEC the ludicrous fine it sought, Father Lemelson’s seven-figure legal costs send a message to future targets that fighting for their rights in court against the SEC will cost them one way or another,” said AAF General Counsel J. Marc Wheat. “If the courts refuse to award Father Lemelson attorney’s fees, despite his prevailing against all of the SEC’s most important charges, the SEC’s abusive powers will only be magnified.”
In June, AAF’s brief in SEC v. Jarkesy argued that requiring targets to litigate through the SEC’s in-house kangaroo courts was a miscarriage of justice. The Supreme Court agreed, clawing back significant power from the administrative state’s in-house ‘administrative law judges’ (ALJs) requiring instead, as the Constitution requires, that civil actions alleging fraud be brought in front of independent Article III courts.
Read the full brief here.
