Menu

Close

Rules of the Game: SCOTUS Term Preview and Advocacy for 501(c)(3)s

Podcast

Brittany Hacker, Susan Finkle Sourlis, Jamaal Lockings

Topics

Community Organizing, Influencing Legislation, Judicial Branch Advocacy, Public Charity Advocacy

The Supreme Court is back in session and the stakes couldn’t be higher. As the justices return to the bench this fall, we’re diving into the biggest cases shaping the future of justice, democracy, and civil rights. In this episode, we’re joined by Jamaal Lockings from AFJ’s Justice Team to break down what’s on the Court’s docket and why it matters. Plus, we’ll unpack how nonprofits can engage in Supreme Court advocacy — from weighing in on key cases to tracking judicial nominees — all while staying nonpartisan and compliant with lobbying rules.

Attorneys for this Episode

  • Brittany Hacker
  • Susan Finkle Sourlis
  • Jamaal Lockings

An Introduction to Our Justice Program 

  • Our justice team works on both federal and state judicial appointments and elections and runs numerous invaluable resources including our judicial vacancy tracker and helps keep us and the public informed about nominees. This includes the decisions they make after they’ve been confirmed, and how cases in federal courts — especially the supreme court — are impacting our civil rights and democracy.
  • Today, we are thrilled to be joined on the pod by our friend and colleague Jamaal Lockings. Jamaal is a fellow attorney who serves as a Dorot Fellow on the Federal Courts team.
  • Today we want to talk about the upcoming cases in this supreme court term, what we should be keeping an eye on, the potential impacts for our c3 partners, and what nonprofits can do during this term and future terms to advocate.

Cases to Watch Out for This Term 

Voting Rights and Money In Politics

Louisiana v. Callais 

  • Issue: Whether a states efforts to comply with the VRA is, in itself, a form of racial discrimination
    1. Rehearing from last term
    2. The Court is playing politics
    3. The VRA is on the chopping block
  • Consequences: A final blow to the VRA, and increased difficulty for minority voters to participate in free and fair elections

National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC 

  • Issue: Whether to maintain the federal limits on political party coordination with candidates in campaign advertising.
    1. Could render campaign contribution limits meaningless, increasing the already outsized influence of money in politics
    2. These cases on elections and voting rights can’t be observed in a vacuum 

LGBTQ+ 

Chiles v. Salazar  

  • Issue: Whether Colorado’s ban on “conversion therapy” for minors violates First Amendment protections of free speech and religious exercise
    1. Religious litigants have been notoriously successful in this court
    2. Free speech and religious exercise have been used not to ensure equity or equality but to prop up Christian nationalist ideology

West Virginia v. B.P.J.  

  • Issue: Title IX and barring Trans athletes
    1. This court continues to wade into culture wars
    2. It’s ruling in Skrmetti and Justice Barrett’s assertion that Trans isn’t a protected states
    3. Embolden lawmakers to continue to write oppressive laws against trans individuals

Executive Power & Civil Liberties

Trump v. Slaughter  

  • Issue: Whether statutory removal protections for members of the FTC – and agencies like it – “violate” the separation of powers.
    1. The Court’s emergency orders this summer
    2. Growing belief in the unitary executive theory
    3. Likely to overrule Humphrey’s executor

Consequences: Collapse of independent agencies and with it, governing stability.

What (c)(3)s Can Do

  • Supreme court advocacy is nonpartisan — you are free to stand for or against cases before any court or get involved in the cases.
    • Litigation at the supreme court: c3s are often the best voice and represent groups who otherwise would not be heard or could not bring such large scale cases
    • Amicus briefs
    • Educating the public about cases and impacts of opinions

As you know (c)(3) public charities may engage in lobbying and there are ways through lobbying that can affect the courts at the federal or maybe the state level.

  • Nominee advocacy — Advocate for or against nominees to supreme court (lobbying)
    • Remember the lower district courts and circuit courts as well
    • Remember the lobbying rules if you are a (c)(3): must track and report your lobbying the IRS and stay within your lobbying limits. Great place for (c)(4)s to get involved because they can lobbying in an unlimited amount.
  • Ethics advocacy — ask congress for more oversight or ethics rules (Lobbying if it will require a legislative vote).

Resources