Institutionalized Persons

• Knight v. Thompson (11th Cir.) - Amicus
  • Alabama failed to meet its burden under RLUIPA of demonstrating that its challenged practice is the least restrictive means of meeting its compelling interests
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	08/27/12

• United States v. California (9th Cir.) - Plaintiff-Appellee
  • The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for intervention on timeliness grounds
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee	06/22/12

• Benjamin v. Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (3d Cir.) – Amicus
  • Properly understood, Olmstead establishes community placement as the default for people for whom community placement is appropriate but who cannot express a preference either for or against community placement
  • The class certified in this case meets the requirements of Rule 23
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, 701 F.3d 938	12/12/12
  Brief as Amicus	04/05/12

• Garner v. Kennedy (5th Cir.) - Amicus
  • TDCJ's ban on beards violates Section 3 of RLUIPA because it is not the least restrictive means of advancing the TDCJ's compelling interests in effective and economical prison security
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Amicus	12/27/11

• United States v. McCoy and McQueen (6th Cir.) - Appellee
  • The district court correctly rejected defendants' request for joint representation due to conflicts of interest
  • The district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision	05/08/12
  Brief as Appellee [PDF]	03/17/11

• Thunderhorse v. Pierce (S. Ct.) – Amicus
  • The Fifth Circuit erred by failing to require that TDCJ explain why the less restrictive practices advocated by Thunderhorse were not feasible, or why the TDCJ’s inconsistent application of the grooming policy did not indicate that less restrictive means were possible
  • Because the courts of appeals, including the Fifth Circuit, have generally correctly applied RLUIPA’s standards, this case does not warrant plenary review, and the Court should therefore either deny the petition or, in the alternative, grant the petition and summarily reverse the Fifth Circuit
  
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari denied, 131 S. Ct. 896	01/10/11
  Brief as amicus in response to Court’s invitation	12/01/10

• Simmons v. Galvin (S. Ct.) – Amicus
  • Given the circumstances of incarceration, Section 2 of the VRA cannot be read to apply to claims brought by currently incarcerated felons
  • A different analysis applies to claims brought by persons who have been released from incarceration, and that Section 2 may apply to such claims
  • The Massachusetts statute does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause
  
   

  Document	Date
  Certiorari denied, 131 S. Ct. 412	10/18/10
  Brief as amicus in response to Court’s invitation	09/15/10

• U.S. v. Puerto Rico (1st Cir.) -- Appellant
  • The court clearly erred in finding the Commonwealth’s efforts reasonably diligent; abused its discretion in failing to consider Puerto Rico’s degree compliance and ability to comply; and erred as a matter of law in concluding that reasonable diligence alone could excuse substantial noncompliance with the stipulated order
  • The automatic stay provision of the PLRA and defendants’ motion to modify the stipulated order did not moot the appeal or render it unripe, and that defendants failed to prove their alleged inability to comply with the court’s order
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 642 F.3d 103	05/26/11
  Reply Brief	12/16/10
  Brief as Appellant	08/23/10

• In re: Erie County (2d Cir.) -- Respondent
  • The County did not satisfy the requirements for mandamus or for an emergency stay
  • The balance of equities favored allowing the inspection of the institution and interviews of staff and inmates to proceed
  • There is no basis for mandamus relief
  
   

  Document	Date
  Order Dismissing Petition For A Writ Of Mandamus As Moot	05/05/10
  Opposition to Motion to Expedite Review of Petition for a Writ of Mandamus [PDF]	04/08/10
  Opposition to Petition for a Writ of Mandamus and Emergency Motion for Stay [PDF]	03/19/10

• Oster v. Wagner (9th Cir.) –Amicus
  • Institutionalization is not a prerequisite for asserting an integration claim
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Order	01/07/13
  Brief as Amicus [PDF]	03/02/10

• United States v. Puerto Rico (1st Cir.) -- Appellee
  • This court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal
  • The district court had authority to delay the automatic stay by 60 days
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [PDF]	04/16/07
  Appeal dismissed	05/29/07

• United States v. Tennessee (6th Cir.) -- Appellant
  • Disregarding rulings that testimony taken solely as a proffer will be subject to cross-examination and rebuttal if later admitted to the record is clear and unequivocal legal error
  • While summary denial of cross-examination is prejudicial per se, prejudice is further demonstrated because the proffered testimony was central to the denial and could have been countered by cross-examination and rebuttal
  • District court did not abuse its discretion in denying the State’s motion because there has not been a change in the governing law sufficient to warrant early termination of the remedial orders in this case
  
   

  Document	Date
  Court of Appeals Decision, 615 F.3d 646	08/04/10
  Brief as Appellant [PDF]	06/14/04
  Reply Brief [PDF]	09/10/04
  Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], unpublished, 143 Fed. Appx. 656	06/23/05
  Brief as Appellee [PDF]	08/03/09

• Johnson & United States v. Regier (11th Cir.) -- Appellee
  • Prevailing defendants in CRIPA actions can be awarded fees only when the United States' case is frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation
  • The district court acted well within its discretion in denying attorney's fees to the State
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [PDF]	12/10/02
  Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 348 F.3d 1334	10/29/03

• People First v. Tennessee (6th Cir.) -- Appellee
  • District court did not err in denying motion of trade group for private contract providers of community services to intervene because it had no cognizable interest in the litigation
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF]	04/18/01
  Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 260 F.3d 587	08/08/01

• People First v. Clover Bottom Developmental Center (6th Cir.) -- Appellee
  • District court did not err in denying motion of trade group for private contract providers of community services to intervene because it had no cognizable interest in the litigation
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [HTML]  [PDF]	06/30/00
  Court of Appeals Decision [PDF], reported at 260 F.3d 587	08/08/01

• Battle v. Fields (10th Cir.) -- Appellee
  • Prisoner's request to proceed in forma pauperis is moot when prisoner was permitted to participate in suit without paying fees
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF]	02/28/00
  Court of Appeals decision [HTML], unpublished	07/28/00

• Evans v. Williams (D.C. Cir.) -- Appellee
  • Distinction between civil and criminal comtempt
  • District court did not abuse discretion in imposing civil contempt sanctions on District of Columbia when it failed to comply with remedial orders requiring timely payment of vendors responsible for providing day-to-day care and services to persons no longer served in institutions
  
   

  Document	Date
  Brief as Appellee [HTML]	11/12/99
  Court of Appeals decision [HTML], reported at 206 F.3d 1292	03/31/00

---

Browse Briefs by Category

Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Criminal
Education
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex, and Religion)
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Housing
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Institutionalized Persons
Religion Cases
Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Voting
Other

---