The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in D.A. v. Tri County Area Schools, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and tell Tri County Area Schools that their students’ political speech—even when it is expressed on a Let’s Go Brandon shirt—is protected by the First Amendment. “The petitioners’ choice of attire, fashionable or not, clearly conveyed a political message without using profanity and is therefore protected by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.”

The Buckeye Institute filed its brief asking the Ohio Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction in Vanderveer v. Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE) and either hold it pending the court’s decision in Sheldon v. OAPSE or consolidate it with Sheldon—one of The Buckeye Institute’s other cases seeking to end union wage theft practices that is pending Ohio Supreme Court review.

The Buckeye Institute filed its second amicus brief in Powell v. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This one with the U.S. Supreme Court, calling on the court to hear the case and overturn the SEC’s unconstitutional gag rule, which prohibits Americans who settle cases with the SEC from discussing the case publicly. “The SEC’s gag rule guarantees that Lady Justice is not only blind, but that she is also deaf.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Newman v. Moore, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case, arguing that the Judicial Council and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit exercised a de facto impeachment of Judge Pauline Newman, a removal power that the U.S. Constitution assigns exclusively to Congress. “This de facto impeachment circumvents the U.S. Constitution’s structural safeguards—bicameral action, supermajority agreement in the U.S. Senate, and public, deliberative proceedings.”

In another filing with the State Employment Relations Board (SERB)—the second in a week—The Buckeye Institute charged the Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE) with an unfair labor practice for refusing to stop its illegal union wage theft from The Buckeye Institute’s client, Anthony Groves, even though Mr. Groves resigned from the union during his opt-out window.
 

The Buckeye Institute prevailed in its efforts to overturn the federal government’s unconstitutional ban on home distilling. Friday’s blockbuster decision in McNutt v. U.S. Department of Justice from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that the federal home-distilling ban is unconstitutional and exceeds Congress’s authority under both the taxing power and the Necessary and Proper Clause. “This decision is an important victory for individual liberty and the principle that the federal government is one of limited powers.”

In a filing with the State Employment Relations Board, The Buckeye Institute charged the Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE) with an unfair labor practice for refusing to stop its illegal union wage theft from The Buckeye Institute’s client, Robert Gibson, even though Mr. Gibson resigned from the union during his opt-out window. “When Mr. Gibson decided to quit the government union, he did his research to decipher OAPSE’s opt-out window hieroglyphs and ensure he abided by the union’s opt-out window.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Pheasant v. United States, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to revive the nondelegation doctrine and tell Congress it cannot abdicate its lawmaking responsibilities—particularly its role in creating criminal statutes—to the executive branch. “When Congress allows executive agencies to create rules and regulations with the effect of laws, Congress has abdicated the responsibility of lawmaking.”

The Buckeye Institute filed its amicus brief in Columbus v. Ohio, calling on the Ohio Supreme Court to uphold Ohio’s broad preemption power, arguing that the state is supreme in matters of general concern and, as a result, state laws preempting local regulations do not violate Ohio’s Home Rule Amendment. “Before Ohio adopted its 1912 Constitution, the meaning of the phrase ‘general laws’ was well-understood as meaning a law of statewide effect.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in FCC v. AT&T and Verizon v. FCC with the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the U.S. Constitution does not allow federal agencies to impose monetary penalties without affording the accused a jury trial. “From the Founding, the right to trial by jury in civil cases was understood as a structural safeguard against governmental overreach. Our Founding Fathers understood that a jury was not a procedural luxury. It was a constitutional check on government power.”