Yale Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Yale Law School Supreme Court Advocacy Clinic provides legal representation to a range of organizations and individuals in the Supreme Court of the United States. The clinic is run by professors at the Yale Law School, including Dan Kahan and Brett Dignam, and by Supreme Court litigators from Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP in Washington, D.C., including Andrew Pincus and Charles Rothfeld, both formerly of the U.S. Solicitor General's office.
The clinic combines classroom instruction with involvement in litigation projects. Under supervision of the clinic instructors, students draft petitions for writs of certiorari, write merits briefs in granted cases, and represent amici curiae.
The Clinic filed its first merits brief in February 2007[1] in the case of Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, a case that deals with taxpayer standing to bring suit against the executive for funding the Office of Faith Based Initiatives. The Question Presented is: Whether the standing principle recognized in Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83 (1968), and reaffirmed unanimously in Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U.S. 605 (1988), permits taxpayers to challenge on Establishment Clause grounds an expenditure of funds pursuant to a congressional appropriation when that expenditure is fairly traceable to the allegedly unconstitu-tional conduct.
As of February 2007, after just one semester of operation, the clinic has filed two amicus briefs, a cert petition, and a merits brief; and has an active docket including two additional petitions for certiorari and one amicus brief.
[edit] References and External Links
- ^ "YLS Supreme Court Clinic Submits Merits Brief in Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation Case", Yale Law School Press Release, February 2, 2007. Retrieved on April 25, 2007.
 |
This law school related article is a stub. You can help by expanding it. |
