This case seeks to cure a decades-old injustice arising from a criminal trial in the early 1980s that was tainted by antisemitism. In ADL’s letter amicus brief supporting defendant Barry Jacobson’s motion for post-conviction relief, ADL explained how one of the most prominent and persistent stereotypes about Jews is that they “are greedy and avaricious, hoping to make themselves rich by any means possible.” ADL argued that the prosecution’s suggestion at trial…

At issue in this case is a business invoking the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to seek a religious exemption from a New York State anti-discrimination law for the purpose of denying wedding photography services to LGBTQ+ couples. In opposing this claim, the legal brief joined by ADL asserts that such an exemption is not required by the Free Exercise Clause. Furthermore, New York’s public accommodations law does not coerce participation in religious activity. Finally,…

This case involves Equal Protection Clause and Title IX challenges to a county school board policy that prohibits transgender students from using the restroom which conforms to their gender identity. ADL and 50 other organizations joined an amicus brief led by the National Women’s Law Center opposing this policy. ADL had joined a previous brief in this case in 2019, resulting in a favorable decision from an 11th Circuit panel. In an en banc hearing, the full 11th Circuit is revisiting…

At issue in this case is a free exercise challenge to a Maine secondary school tuition assistance program. To provide for high school education in over half of the State’s school districts that do not have public secondary schools, Maine pays for students to attend public or private schools which provide secular education, including religiously affiliated schools that do not indoctrinate religion. The lawsuit was brought by parents seeking to send their children to religious schools. ADL…

The Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference (CIAC) has a policy that allows K-12 athletes to participate in sports consistent with their gender identity. This inclusive policy and others like it help protect the safety and wellbeing of transgender youth, and help ensure that all women and girls can access the well-documented benefits of playing sports. In an amicus brief led by the National Women’s Law Center, ADL joined 34 other organizations in supporting CIAC against this…

In this case brought by families of dozens of American victims of Hamas terrorist attacks, the U.S. Court of Appeals granted summary judgment in favor of a British-based bank that provides banking services to a company, Interpal, that has been designated as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” (SDGT) by the U.S. Treasury Department. The issue is whether a bank that is “generally aware” of Interpal’s connection to Hamas can be held liable under U.S. anti…

The Orange County, Florida Human Rights Ordinance provides broader anti-discrimination protections than the State’s Human Rights Law, including prohibitions on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. At issue in this case is whether the State law preempts these broader protections.  ADL joined a brief asserting that the Florida Constitution and long-standing State Supreme Court rulings permit county and municipal governments to adopt more comprehensive anti…

Mississippi passed a law in 2018 that bars abortions after the 15th week of pregnancy, with limited exceptions. ADL joined with the National Women’s Law Center and 71 other organizations on an amicus brief urging that the law — an unmistakable challenge to Roe v. Wade — be found unconstitutional. The brief focuses on due process and explains that the devastating impact of allowing a pre-viability abortion ban to stand — or overturning the right to abortion entirely …

At issue in this case is the application of the First Amendment’s ministerial employee exception to an art teacher at a religious elementary school. Grounded in constitutionally mandated separation of church and state, the exception exempts religious institutions from all employment discrimination laws for employees deemed to be ministerial. A lower state court ruled that the teacher, who performed no “vital religious duties,” could move forward with her pregnancy and marital…

Alabama only allows people to change the gender marker on their driver’s licenses if they undergo surgical procedures and submit proof to the state, meaning that transgender people who do not want, cannot afford, or are medically unable to have the required surgeries are prevented from having a license that accurately reflects their gender. Carrying a license with an inaccurate gender marker puts transgender people — especially Black and brown transgender women — at a…

In March 2019, the United States Senior Women's National Soccer Team (USWNT) filed a class action lawsuit against the United States Soccer Federation, Inc. (USSF), claiming violations of the Equal Pay Act and of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleging unequal pay and working conditions as compared to the Men’s National Team (USMNT) in the District Court of Central California. For years, the U.S. Soccer Federation had been paying USWNT players less than their counterparts on…

This case involves a legal challenge to Massachusetts’s anti-bullying statute — namely, that the “emotional harm” prong of the definition of bullying in M.G.L. c. 71, section 37O(a) is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. ADL has been a key proponent of anti-bullying legislation in Massachusetts and accordingly joined an amicus brief, prepared by GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), to emphasize the vital importance of the emotional harm prong of the…

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits voting practices and procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in language minority groups. In this case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that two Arizona election provisions — one that prohibits third-party ballot collection and another that prohibits the counting of out-of-precinct votes — violated Section 2 because of their discriminatory impact on communities of color. The…

Under the “Remain in Mexico” policy, also known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), certain asylum seekers arriving at the U.S./Mexico border were forced to return to Mexico to await their U.S. asylum hearing. As of January 2021, tens of thousands of MPP asylum seekers were waiting in Mexico for their asylum hearings, which had been postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic since March 2020 with no clear dates for when the hearings would resume. ADL joined 110 other…

This case involves a constitutional challenge to a temporary admissions program, developed in the wake of COVID-19, for Boston’s three highly selective Exam Schools. The argument put forth by plaintiff is that the new plan — which involves the suspension of entrance exams in favor of criteria that value high academic standards, increased neighborhood equity, socioeconomic inclusion and racial diversity — is a race-based quota program that purportedly “disfavor[s] Asian…

At issue in this case is the extent to which K-12 schools can regulate student speech that occurs off-campus. ADL joined a brief prepared by the National Women’s Law Center, Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, urging the Court to ensure that when it comes to off-campus speech, schools can regulate student bullying, harassment, or threats, but not speech that is merely perceived to substantially disrupt school activities. The…

At issue in this case is a private religious school’s Free Exercise clause challenge to a State of Michigan COVID-19 order requiring all persons who are at least five years old to wear face masks whenever they are in a shared space with someone outside their household, including both public and private schools. The brief asserts that in the context of a national pandemic that has taken the lives of 543,000 Americans, including more than 16,900 Michigan residents, the order is fully…

At issue in this case is a church invoking the Free Exercise Clause to seek a broad exemption from California coronavirus public-health orders that restrict indoor religious gatherings to the same extent or more favorably than similarly situated secular gatherings. In opposing this claim, the legal brief joined by ADL explains that the history of the Free Exercise Clause demonstrates it was never intended to require religious exemptions from laws that protect public health or safety. Rather,…

At issue in this case is a church and member of the clergy invoking the Free Exercise Clause to seek a broad exemption from California coronavirus public-health orders that restrict indoor religious gatherings to the same extent or more favorably than similarly situated secular gatherings. In opposing this claim, the legal brief joined by ADL explains that the history of the Free Exercise Clause demonstrates it was never intended to require religious exemptions from laws that protect public…

At issue in this case is clergy and congregants from several churches invoking the Free Exercise Clause to seek a full exemption from California coronavirus public-health orders that restrict indoor religious gatherings to the same extent or more favorably than similarly situated secular gatherings. In opposing this claim, the legal brief joined by ADL explains that the history of the Free Exercise Clause demonstrates it was never intended to require religious exemptions from laws that protect…