Okay, deep breath, let's get this over with. In the grand act of digital self-sabotage, we've littered this site with cookies. Yep, we did that. Why? So your highness can have a 'premium' experience or whatever. These traitorous cookies hide in your browser, eagerly waiting to welcome you back like a guilty dog that's just chewed your favorite shoe. And, if that's not enough, they also tattle on which parts of our sad little corner of the web you obsess over. Feels dirty, doesn't it?
Judicial Conference’s Proposal: A Comedy of Errors for Amicus Briefs!
EFF fights for your civil liberties in the digital age, with amicus briefs playing a vital role. However, proposed rule changes could limit their use, possibly leading to fewer expert insights in court. EFF urges the Judicial Conference to reconsider, preserving the impact of these briefs in defending your digital rights.
Hot Take:
Looks like the Judicial Conference wants to play hardball with amicus briefs. But let’s be real—if EFF’s amicus briefs were a Netflix series, they’d be rated “Must Watch” by the courts. What’s next, a subscription fee to watch these legal dramas unfold?
Key Points:
- The EFF uses amicus briefs to offer courts an outsider’s perspective on cases impacting digital rights.
- Proposed changes to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29 could limit EFF’s ability to file amicus briefs.
- One change would “disfavor” briefs on issues already mentioned by the parties involved.
- Another change would require formal court approval before filing an amicus brief, eliminating current consent provisions.
- EFF argues these changes could stifle valuable contributions to legal discussions affecting digital rights.
Already a member? Log in here