NCLA at the Supreme Court
View CasesWhen federal agencies write the rules, enforce them, and judge the outcome, the Supreme Court is often the only referee left. NCLA has taken the fight to the Administrative State and won, from ending Chevron deference to restoring jury rights to stopping runaway agencies from acting outside the law.
NCLA as Counsel
Who decides what the law means — judges or federal agencies?
- Thanks to our win in Relentless, and companion case Loper Bright, courts no longer defer to agencies’ readings of ambiguous statutes. With these cases, the Supreme Court overturned 40 years of Chevron deference.
- The ruling reshaped administrative law nationwide and earned NCLA the inaugural Mellor Prize for its role in ending Chevron.
Can a federal agency turn lawful conduct into a crime on its own?
- Thanks to our 6–3 win in Garland v. Cargill, the Supreme Court permanently set aside ATF’s bump-stock ban, holding the agency could not stretch the statutory definition of “machinegun” to cover a device Congress never addressed.
- The ruling restored the rights of client Michael Cargill and potentially hundreds of thousands of other Americans to be free from laws rewritten by executive-branch bureaucrats.
Can you challenge an agency’s in-house court before suffering it?
- Thanks to our win in SEC v. Cochran, a unanimous Court held that people facing an agency’s administrative tribunal can challenge its constitutionality in federal court first, rather than after being forced to complete the administrative process.
- The decision overturned contrary precedent in six federal circuits and now protects Americans summoned before ALJs at the SEC, FTC, and other agencies.
NCLA as Amicus Curiae
SEC v. Jarkesy
Do jury trial rights apply against federal agencies?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in SEC v. Jarkesy contributed to the Court’s holding that targets of agency civil-penalty actions have a Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial.
- The Court also recognized a right to an Article III court in these cases, an argument raised only in NCLA’s brief, because Congress cannot transfer judicial power that it does not have to an agency.
Trump v. Slaughter
Can Congress shield federal officials from presidential removal?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in Trump v. Slaughter contributed to the Supreme Court’s overruling of Humphrey’s Executor and its holding that the President can remove FTC commissioners at will.
- The decision reaches roughly two dozen independent agencies — including the NLRB, FERC, CPSC, and SEC — making them directly accountable to the President.
FDA v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co.
Who can challenge a federal agency’s decision in court?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in FDA v. R.J. Reynolds contributed to the Court’s confirming that anyone harmed by an FDA order — not just the applicant — can sue, and need not do so in the applicant’s home state.
- The majority opinion cited NCLA’s brief, preserving the judicial-review rights that many other federal statutes depend on.
Learning Resources v. Trump
Can the President impose nationwide tariffs without authority from Congress?
- NCLA, on behalf of our client Emily Ley, led the legal challenge to the President’s IEEPA tariffs by filing the nation’s first lawsuit, Simplified v. Trump, framing the legal arguments that ultimately prevailed at the Supreme Court.
- The Court embraced every statutory argument NCLA advanced against the tariffs, including a key point later reflected in Chief Justice Roberts’s majority opinion.
- NCLA mobilized a nationwide amicus brief effort to strengthen the Learning Resources v. Trump case.
Chatrie v. United States
Can police search everyone’s location data to find a suspect?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in Chatrie v. United States contributed to the Court’s holding that collecting cell phone location history through a geofence warrant is a Fourth Amendment search, even for a limited time and even when a third-party tech company holds the data.
- The ruling reaffirms Carpenter as a watershed precedent and sends the case back to the Fourth Circuit to decide whether the government violated Mr. Chatrie’s rights at each stage of the warrant.
Martin v. United States
Can victims of a mistaken government raid sue for the harm?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in Martin v. U.S. contributed to the Supreme Court’s unanimous revival of a lawsuit brought after an FBI SWAT team raided the wrong house.
- The ruling confirms Americans can hold the federal government accountable for wrong-house raids.
West Virginia v. B.P.J.
Does Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause let schools keep female sports teams for biological females?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in West Virginia v. B.P.J. contributed to the Court’s holding that Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause allow schools to maintain separate women’s and men’s sports teams defined by biological sex.
- The 6–3 ruling upheld similar laws or regulations in 27 states.
Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney
Should courts rubber-stamp the NLRB’s injunction requests?
- NCLA’s amicus brief in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney contributed to the Court’s requiring the NLRB to meet the same demanding standard as anyone to get a preliminary injunction.
- The ruling ended a lenient special test that had let the Board shut down employer decisions without first showing likely illegal conduct.
Alabama Ass’n of Realtors v. HHS
Can the CDC ban evictions nationwide without authority from Congress?
- NCLA filed the first lawsuit in the nation challenging CDC’s eviction moratorium, and the Supreme Court in Alabama Association of Realtors v. HHS held the moratorium unlawful for the same reasons NCLA first argued.
- The ruling ended the nationwide moratorium for all housing providers and confirmed that agencies cannot claim sweeping powers Congress never granted.
What Others Are Saying
“What in the world are historians going to call this Supreme Court?” “Why not, though, the ‘Hamburger Court’? This would be after the visionary law professor Philip Hamburger of Columbia University. He, so far as we’re aware, has never sat on any bench. Yet, in the closing weeks of this Supreme Court term, he is coming into view as potentially having a historic impact on American law. He is pressing his cause to rein in the runaway administrative state via not only his scholarly work but his founding, in 2017, of a new civil rights organization. It is called the New Civil Liberties Alliance.”
The 2021 New York Sun editorial, “The Hamburger Court”
“I just want to point out that the New Civil Liberties Alliance, it is because of you that we have had one of the greatest, I would say the greatest decision of this century that overturned the Chevron doctrine.”
Dagen McDowell, co-host, The Bottom Line, Fox Business
“[NCLA] has emerged in recent years as a litigation powerhouse, taking a number of cases challenging agency power that have reached the US Supreme Court.”
Bloomberg Law
The Mellor Prize
in Public Interest Litigation
Presented to the New Civil Liberties Alliance
for ending Chevron deference
and
The Institute for Justice
Washingtonian Magazine’s 500 Most Influential People
Are You Up Against the Administrative State?
NCLA represents clients at no charge when their cases challenge unlawful agency power. If a federal agency has denied you due process, silenced your speech, or acted beyond its statutory authority, your case may belong before the Justices.
Stay Informed
Get NCLA’s case updates in video and news bulletins, delivered to your inbox.