Due to the lapse in appropriations, Department of Justice websites will not be regularly updated. The Department’s essential law enforcement and national security functions will continue. Please refer to the Department of Justice’s contingency plan for more information.

Appellate Briefs And Opinions

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act

  • United States v. Dillard (10th Cir.) - Appellant/Cross-Appellee
    • The district court incorrectly applied the test for a true threat
    • The district court applied the wrong legal standard in requiring that the threatened violence be imminent and unconditional
    • The district court misapplied the requirement to the facts of this case, i.e., a reasonable person could read the letter to suggest that Dillard would be a participant in the threatened violence and that the letter was not just a prediction of harm at the hands of others
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 795 F.3d 1191 07/28/15
    Reply/Cross-Appellee Brief (Under Seal) 08/01/14
    Brief as Appellant/Cross-Appellee 04/02/14
  • McCullen v. Coakley (S. Ct.) - Amicus
    • The Massachusetts statute that creates 35-foot buffer zones around reproductive health care facilities' entrances and driveways is neutral as to both content and viewpoint, and it survives intermediate scrutiny
    Document Date 
    Supreme Court Decision, reported at 134 S. Ct. 2518 06/26/14
    Brief as Amicus 11/22/13
  • United States v. Alaw (D.C. Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Whether the district court erred in finding that Defendants were sufficiently likely to violate the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, 18 U.S.C. 248 (Access Act), in the future to warrant issuing an injunction
    • Whether injunctive relief under the Access Act must be predicated upon pervasive, egregious, unlawful conduct
    • Whether injunctive relief is prohibited if civil penalties are available to deter future illegal conduct
    • Whether the injunction issued on remand violates the First Amendment because it prohibits otherwise lawful expressive conduct
    • Whether the district court was required by the First Amendment to prohibit only acts committed with the mens rea necessary to prove a violation of the Access Act
    • Whether the injunction is unconstitutionally overbroad because it is not tailored to each covered facility
    • Whether the injunction is unconstitutional because it does not permit Defendants to sit, stand or kneel alone in front of the entrances of covered facilities
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 327 F.3d 1217 05/06/03
    Brief as Appellee 10/22/02
  • United States v. Alaw (D.C. Cir.) -- Appellee
    • Defendants' conduct violated the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
    • Injunction issued to enforce FACE does not violate the First Amendment
    Document Date 
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 247 F.3d 279 05/01/01
    Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF] 11/27/00
  • United States v. Hart (8th Cir.) -- Appellee
    • FACE is a valid exercise of the Commerce Clause
    • FACE does not violate the First Amendment
    • FACE is not vague or overbroad
    • Parking rental trucks at the entrance of abortion clinics could constitute a "threat of force," in violation of FACE
    Document Date
    Certiorari Denied, reported at 531 U.S. 1114 01/16/01
    Opposition to Petition for Writ of Certiorari 12/13/00
    Petition for Rehearing En Banc Denied 06/16/00
    Brief Opposing Petition for Rehearing En Banc [HTML] [PDF] 05/31/00
    Court of Appeals Decision, reported at 212 F.3d 1067 05/01/00
    Brief as Appellee [HTML] [PDF] 06/19/99

Browse Briefs by Category

Affirmative Action
Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
Constitutionality of Federal Statutes
Employment Discrimination (Race, National Origin, Sex, and Religion)
Equal Access to Justice Act
Equal Credit Opportunity Act
Equal Protection Clause
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Institutionalized Persons
Police Misconduct (Civil Cases)
Religion Cases
Servicemember Cases
Third Party Intervention in Civil Rights Cases
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Updated November 12, 2015

Was this page helpful?

Was this page helpful?
Yes No