Bernard Brief Bank: Adding Amicus Arguments
In case you didn't already know, the United States Supreme Court is set to determine whether or not Minnesota's DWI laws are constitutional. The highest Court accepted review of three cases - here they are, with hyperlinks to the Supreme Court docket for each case:
Bernard v. Minnesota (14-1470): is it constitutional for a state to criminalize the act of refusing to submit to a warrantless DWI search?
Birchfield v. North Dakota (14-1468): Is it constitutional for a state to criminalize the act of refusing to submit to a warrantless DWI search?
Beylund v. North Dakota (14-1507): Is it constitutional for a state to claim that a driver "consented" to a warrantless search when that driver was threatened with the crime of refusal?
We'll be releasing the briefs filed in these cases over the course of the next week or so. Along with the three "merits" briefs we previously posted, four amicus briefs were filed. Locally, the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice and the Minnesota Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys (MSCJ/MACDL) filed an amicus brief. Nationally, they were joined by the DUI Defense Lawyers Association (DUIDLA), the National College for DUI Defense (NCDD) the Downsize DC Foundation, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Here are the first two amicus briefs:
- Brief of Amicus Curiae Minnesota Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (MACDL) and Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice (MSCJ)
- Brief of Amicus Curiae DUI Defense Lawyers Association (DUIDLA)
In the interests of full disclosure, Dan Koewler of Ramsay Law Firm authored the brief submitted by DUIDLA and is the Chairman of the Amicus Committee for MACDL. Charles Ramsay of Ramsay Law Firm is a member of the Amicus Committee for DUIDLA. Both Dan and Chuck are members of all three organizations.