At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a decision by the City of Boston to reject a request by some residents to raise the Christian flag in front of City Hall, next to the American flag and the Massachusetts state flag. ADL filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, highlighting that the consequence of a finding that Boston’s City Hall flagpoles are a public forum would be that anyone could express any viewpoint from them, subject only to reasonable time,…

At issue in this case is a school district’s policy allowing transgender students to use the restrooms and changing facilities consistent with their gender identities. ADL, which has provided anti-bias training to schools around the country through its No Place for Hate® program for over a decade, filed an amici brief supporting the policy of Dallas School District No. 2 in Oregon. Our brief was joined by LGBTQ advocacy organizations, civil society groups, youth advocates, and…

At issue in this case is partisan gerrymandering in both North Carolina and Maryland — i.e., the drawing of district lines to subordinate adherents of one political party and entrench the rival party in power. In each state, the political party in power (i.e., Republican leaders in North Carolina and Democratic leaders in Maryland) successfully created precise and durable maps that would ensure the entrenchment of that party for at least the next decade. ADL accordingly joined a brief…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a Pennsylvania House of Representatives policy barring nontheists from serving as guest chaplains to offer the Chamber’s daily invocation. ADL’s brief asserts that the policy is unconstitutional for two reasons. First, it violates longstanding Establishment Clause precedent prohibiting government from preferring one religion over others. Second, the House’s justification that historically nontheists have not given invocations…

This case highlights the importance of class actions as a means of redress for victims of discrimination. The Ninth Circuit Appeals Court was asked to address whether the analysis and assessment by the Federal District Court in Washington State denying class certification to a proposed class of female engineers alleging systemic and pervasive discrimination was erroneous and created an arbitrary threshold for anecdotal evidence not required by law. ADL and 29 other civil rights and women…

At issue in this case is the Administration’s termination of temporary protected status (TPS) for individuals from El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua and Sudan. TPS is a form of humanitarian immigration relief that allows individuals from designated countries to live and work legally in the U.S. if they cannot return safely to their country of origin due to armed conflict, natural disaster or other extraordinary circumstances. Most TPS recipients came to the U.S. at a young age, lived here…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a state-sponsored, 40-foot Latin cross that  dominates a veterans memorial in Bladensburg, Maryland dedicated to local soldiers who died during World War I. The brief discusses the power of symbols, particularly religious ones such as the Latin cross, which are laden with history and convey poignant messages to both Christians and non-adherents. It further explains why the memorial conveys a hurtful message of religious exclusion and…

The City of Phoenix has an anti-discrimination law that prohibits businesses from discriminating against customers on the basis of sexual orientation and other personal characteristics.  Based on its religious objections to same-sex marriage, a local art design company does not want to create and sell wedding invitations to same-sex couples, which would violate the Phoenix law. The company filed a lawsuit invoking the Arizona Free Exercise of Religion Act (“FERA”) and First…

This case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (HCPA) in a case in which an Amazon shipping warehouse employee was violently assaulted by a co-worker due to his perceived sexual orientation. The District Court vacated a unanimous jury conviction under the HCPA, on the grounds that the HCPA was an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s Commerce Clause power as applied in this case. On appeal, ADL joined an…

This case involves a challenge to immigration enforcement-related conditions imposed by the Justice Department on the receipt of federal public safety grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (“JAG”) program. ADL's brief argues that, far from improving community safety, these conditions would only undermine Philadelphia’s protections of immigrants through its “Welcoming City” policies, compromising public safety for all. Immigrants, who are…

After the City of Philadelphia learned that certain of its foster care providers, including Catholic Social Services (CSS), would not license same-sex couples to be foster parents, the City ceased referring children to these agencies. CSS subsequently sued the City, arguing that it had a constitutional right to reject qualified same-sex couples as a matter of free exercise of religion. ADL filed an amicus brief in support of the City on behalf of a broad coalition of religious and religiously…

At stake in this case are two interim final rules (IFRs) promulgated by the Trump Administration in October 2017 that significantly broadened the religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraception mandate. Prior mandate regulations accommodated houses of worship and religiously affiliated organizations. The new exemption, however, effectively repeals the contraception mandate, broadly allowing employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their…

At issue in these cases is the Commerce Department’s attempt to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. The cases are California v. Ross, brought by the state of California and several California cities and counties in City of San Jose and Black Alliance for Just Immigration v. Ross. ADL joined the Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights and over 130 other grassroots, advocacy, labor, legal services, and civil rights organizations in submitting amicus briefs opposing…

At issue in this case is a challenge to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program by a group of states led by the Texas Attorney General seeking to permanently enjoin the DACA program based on the theory that President Obama did not have the authority to enact it. The New Jersey Attorney General’s Office intervened to defend DACA as did a group of DACA grantees represented by MALDEF.  Together, they are opposing Texas’s request that the court block DHS from…

Citing religious objections, a business owner refused to sell custom t-shirts bearing “Lexington Pride Festival 2012” and rainbow colored circles to a non-profit LGBTQ organization. The local human rights commission found that the vendor’s actions violated a human rights ordinance, which prohibits businesses from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. A lower court reversed the commission’s determination, finding that it infringed on the vendor’s First…

Updated: April 02, 2019 At the U.S. Supreme Court, ADL joined with over 170 organizations on an amicus brief that refutes defendants' argument that including a citizenship question is necessary to enforce Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, explains how the VRA can be enforced without the citizenship question, and explains how the inclusion of a citizenship question will lead to an undercount of historically under-represented communities, including immigrants. June 18, 2018 At…

At stake in this case are two interim final rules (IFRs) promulgated by the Trump administration in October 2017 that significantly broadened the religious exemption to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) contraception mandate. Prior mandate regulations accommodated houses of worship and religiously affiliated organizations. The new exemption, however, effectively repeals the contraception mandate, broadly allowing employers and universities to invoke religion or morality to block their…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of the U.S. House of Representatives’ guest chaplain policy. Because the policy requires guest chaplains to offer a prayer that addresses a “higher power,” as well as to be ordained clergy, it bars non-theists from the invocation opportunity. A Humanist leader challenged the policy under the Constitution’s Establishment Clause. ADL joined a coalition brief asserting that policy is unconstitutional for four reasons. First,…

At issue in this case are three laws (SB54, AB103, and AB45) the state of California passed in 2017 to protects its immigrants and foster trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities by limiting and clarifying the roles of local law enforcement and government officials in assisting federal immigration enforcement efforts. The Department of Justice (DOJ) sued California erroneously claiming that such laws violate federal immigration law. ADL filed an amicus brief in this case in…

At issue in this case is the constitutionality of a county commission policy prohibiting non-theists from offering the opening prayer at commission meetings. A lower ruled that the policy violated the Establishment Clause to the First Amendment. ADL filed a brief on behalf of a diverse group of religious and civil rights organizations. The brief asserts that policy is unconstitutional for four reasons. First, it plainly violates the U.S. Supreme Court’s non-discrimination requirement for…