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.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Craig v. Cromes, calling on the Ohio Supreme Court to hear the case and put an end to Cuyahoga County’s home equity theft scheme. When they loaded their wagons and lit out for the West, the men and women who settled what would become Cuyahoga County would have understood the takings clause to plainly encompass the right to recover the surplus value—or equity—of their property’s value if their property was foreclosed on and sold to settle a tax debt.

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Hedgepeth v. Britton, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and protect the First Amendment rights of government employees, including teachers. This case illustrates the tension between suppressing speech based on a heckler’s veto and protecting out-of-school speech that does not actually disrupt the learning environment or undermine the employee’s ability to fulfill his or her job.

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief in Carbin v. Massachusetts Board of State Examiners of Plumbers and Gas Fitters, calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case and revive the judiciary’s independent duty to interpret and enforce constitutional limits. The Manhattan Institute joined The Buckeye Institute in filing its brief. “The Constitution was not designed to subordinate liberty to legislative convenience, and due respect for Congress does not entail blind acceptance of its assertions.”

The Buckeye Institute filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Relentless v. U.S. Department of Commerce, calling on the court to reverse the lower court’s ruling and throw out a U.S. Department of Commerce rule that forces commercial fishermen to house, feed, and pay the salaries of their government-mandated monitors. In reaching its decision, the lower court ignored the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision overturning the Chevron doctrine—judicial deference to executive agencies’ interpretation of the law.

The Buckeye Institute filed its appeal brief in DuPuis v. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) with Ohio’s Sixth District Court of Appeals, calling on the court to reverse the lower court’s dismissal of the case and end the union’s wage theft practices. “Ohio’s Constitution is clear, ‘All courts shall be open, and every person…shall have justice administered without denial or delay.’” 

The Buckeye Institute filed a supplemental brief in Ream v. U.S. Department of Treasury—its case seeking to overturn the federal ban on home distilling—in response to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ordering the government to address the constitutional claims at stake.

After The Buckeye Institute filed its appeal asking the Ohio Supreme Court to hear Sheldon v. OAPSE, Freedom Foundation, Liberty Justice Center, Mackinac Center for Public Policy, and National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation filed an amicus brief in support of The Buckeye Institute’s client Matthew Sheldon, urging the court to take the case and put an end to illegal union wage theft.

The Buckeye Institute filed its fourth amicus brief with the Ohio Supreme Court in Bowling v. DeWine, urging the court to affirm, once and for all, that Ohio’s Cooperation Statute does not require the governor to accept federal money every time it is offered. The statute is crystal clear in stating that nothing “precludes the director from ceasing to participate in any voluntary, optional, special, or emergency program offered by the federal government.”