Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc. (1983):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 8/82] -- Whether the City of Akron's adoption of an informed consent requirement for abortions, which mandated that the individual providing pre-abortion counseling must be the woman's attending physician (as opposed to other qualified professionals) and specified the kind and substance of the information to be presented, was constitutional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Ake v. Oklahoma (1985):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 6/84] -- Whether an indigent defendant has the constitutional right to the appointment of a mental health professional at the State's expense to help the defendant prepare an insanity defense and rebut evidence of future dangerousness. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Alaska v. R. H. Wetherhorn (1984):
[Alaska Court of Appeals/brief filed 10/83] -- Whether admissions of child abuse made during either voluntarily-obtained or court-ordered therapy are admissible in a criminal trial or protected by the state's privileged communication statutes and the right against self-incrimination under the state and/or federal constitution. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Andersen v. King County (2006):
[Supreme Court of the State of Washington/brief filed 2/05] -– addresses a challenge to the constitutionality of Washington’s statutes limiting the right to marry to opposite-sex couples. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Atkins v. Virginia (2002):
[US Supreme Court/motion filed 11/19/01 to have McCarver v. North Carolina brief considered in this case] -- addresses the question, "whether the execution of mentally retarded individuals convicted of capital crimes violates the Eighth Amendment."

BenShalom v. Marsh (1989):
[US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit/brief filed 3/89] -- Whether the US Army may constitutionally deny reenlistment to any serviceperson who declares him/herself to have a homosexual orientation. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Blue Shield of Virginia v. McCready (1982):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/82] Whether an insured patient receiving psychotherapy has standing to sue for treble damages under antitrust laws (i.e., the Clayton Act) when third party payors refuse to reimburse psychologists for mental health services unless those services are billed by physicians (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Bodell v. Superior Court (2007):
[Court of Appeal of the State of California, 2nd Appellate District/letter in support of cert filed 1/07] -- whether the Superior court may compel the production of psychiatric and medical records upon a mere showing of “relevance” and with no stated compelling public interest. (Read the Letter of Petition for Review)

Boswell v. Boswell (1998):
[Maryland Court of Appeals/brief filed 7/98] -- Whether a gay father may be denied overnight visitation with his children and visitations in the presence of his male partner (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Bottoms v. Bottoms (1995):
[Virginia Court of Appeals/brief filed 11/93 & Virginia Supreme Court/brief filed 12/94] -- Whether a lesbian biological mother could be denied custody of her child on the grounds that her sexual orientation rendered her unfit as a parent (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Bowen v. Kendrick (1988):
[US Supreme Court/APA joined a brief filed 2/88] -- Whether the 1981 Adolescent Family Life Act (AFLA) was constitutional, including whether it violated the constitutional rights of individuals to make informed reproductive decisions free of government coercion. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Bowers v. Hardwick (1986):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/86] -- Whether Georgia's sodomy law which outlawed private sexual conduct between consenting adults was constitutional. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 3/29/2000] -- Whether the Boy Scouts' claim that the recent New Jersey Supreme Court's decision, that the Boy Scouts of America is subject to the State's Law Against Discrimination and violated the law in expelling an assistant scoutmaster because he stated publicly that he is gay, infringes upon its First Amendment right to freedom of association (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Boy Scouts of America, National Capital Area Council v. Pool et al (2002):
[D.C. Court of Appeals/APA brief filed 2/26/02] -- Addresses the Boy Scout's claim that the decision of the District of Columbia's Commission on Human Rights that the BSA is subject to DC law against discrimination and violated the law in terminating all relationships with two gay former Eagle Scouts, is contrary to the Supreme Court precedent in Dale v. Boy Scouts of America and infringes on its First Amendment right to freedom of association. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Bucy v. Bucy (1990):
[Connecticut Court of Appeals/brief filed 2/90] -- whether expenses incurred in psychotherapy for the treatment of eating disorders are "medical expenses" within the meaning of a separation and support decree. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

California Association of Psychology Providers v. Rank (1990):
[California Supreme Court/brief filed 6/88] -- Whether certain California regulations were inconsistent with legislation defining the scope of psychologists' practice in hospitals and permitting psychologists to provide services as independent practitioners "without discrimination" (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Campbell v. Sundquist (1996):
[Tennessee Court of Appeals/brief filed 10/95] -- Whether a Tennessee "Homosexual Acts" statute prohibiting private sexual activity between consenting adults of the same sex violates the Tennessee Constitution's right to privacy (Read full-text amicus brief). (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Chandler Exterminators, Inc. v. Morris (1992):
[Georgia Court of Appeals/brief filed 12/90 & Georgia Supreme Court/brief in support of petition for reconsideration filed 6/92] -- Whether the lower court erred in rejecting the testimony of a neuropsychologist concerning the causes of brain damage as a result of exposure to the neurotoxic substance Aldrin and ruling that psychologists are not competent to testify as to the organic causes of psychological dysfunction by stating "Medical causation is not a subject within the scope of psychological expertise." (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Citizens for Equal Protection v. Bruning (2006):
[US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit/brief filed 11/05] – involves a federal challenge to a section of the Nebraska constitution that bans any legal recognition of same-sex couples.
(Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. (1985):
[(US Supreme Court/APA signed onto brief filed 1984] -- Whether zoning restrictions limiting the right of mentally retarded persons to establish group homes was unconstitutional. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Clark v. Arizona (2006):
[U.S. Supreme Court/APA signed onto brief filed 1/06] – at issue is the scope of the constitutional duty of states to allow evidence of sanity to be used as a defense in criminal cases relevant to the intent element of a charged crime. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Colorado v. Connelly (1986):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 3/86] -- Whether an individual diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic acting in response to "command hallucinations" is competent to waive Miranda rights and his subsequent confession is voluntary and admissible. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Comfort v. Lynn (2005):
[Missouri Supreme Court/brief filed 6/98] -- Whether a lesbian mother may be denied custody solely on the basis of her sexual orientation rather than on the basis of what is in the best interests of the child. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Conaway v. Deane (2007): 
[Maryland Court of Appeals/brief filed 10/06] -- addresses a constitutional challenge to Maryland’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Currie v. United States (1987):
[US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit/brief filed 1/87] -- Whether a psychotherapist is liable under tort law for failure to institute involuntary commitment proceedings (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Delong v. Delong (1998):
[Missouri Supreme Court/brief filed 6/98] -- Whether a lesbian mother may be denied custody solely on the basis of her sexual orientation rather than on the basis of what is in the best interests of the child. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Dept. of Human Services v. Howard (2006):
[Supreme Court of Arkansas/brief filed 12/05] – at issue is a challenge to an administrative regulation promulgated by the Arkansas Child Welfare Agency Review Board that prohibits anyone who has a “homosexual” adult household member from providing foster care for children. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Dept. of Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms v. Galioto (1986):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 2/86] -- Whether provisions of a federal crime statute which permanently prohibited any individual adjudicated as suffering from a mental defective or committed to any mental institution from receiving, transporting, or shipping a firearm or ammunition in interstate commerce or being sold a firearm was unconstitutional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Detroit Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations Board (1979):
[US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit/brief filed 1976 & US Supreme Court/brief filed 1977] -- Whether an order of the National Labor Relations Board that required Detroit Edison to provide to a union with copies of an actual test battery and employees' raw scores and test papers without their consent should be enforced in light of confidentiality and test security concerns.

Emerich v. Philadelphia Center for Human Development, Inc. (1998):
[Pennsylvania Supreme Court/brief filed 10/96] -- Whether a mental health professional has a duty to warn a third party of a patient's threats to harm the third party and the scope of any such duty (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati (1995):
[US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit/brief filed 12/94] -- Whether an anti-gay rights ballot initiative was constitutional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Estate of Davis v. Yong-Oh Lhim (1986):
[Michigan Supreme Court/brief filed 7/86] -- Whether a psychotherapist is liable under tort law for the standard of care concerning the discharge of patients from mental hospitals and not a therapist's duty to warn of potential danger. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Ewing v.Goldstein (2004):
[California Supreme Court/letter in support of petition for review filed 9/04] -– addresses review of a decision that extends California’s duty to warn statute from communications from the patient to the therapist to include communications about the patient from a third party (Read the Letter of Petition for Review) (Read the Letter of Petition for Review)

Faulkner v. National Geographic Enterprises, Inc., (2005):
[US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit/brief filed 6/04] – addresses the rights of scholarly publishers to digitize their present and past works. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Ford v. Norton, 107 Cal. Rptr. 2d 776 (2001):
[Court of Appeal of the State of California/brief filed 1/6/00] - the case raises the issue of the scope of psychologists' practice (i.e., whether a clinical psychologist is authorized to order the early release of a patient who is hospitalized involuntarily). (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Ford v. Wainwright (1986):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/86] -- Whether (1) it is unconstitutional to execute an incompetent person, and (2) the procedural issue of whether Florida's statutory scheme for evaluating the competency of a condemned prisoner meets the requirements of due process. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Forrest v. Ambach (1983):
[NY Supreme Court/briefs filed 9/80, 7/81 & NY Supreme Court, Appellate Division/brief filed 12/82] -- Whether the New York Commissioner of Education acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner in not permitting a school psychologist to challenge her employment termination for due disagreeing with the State Commissioner regarding the statutory requirements for services to handicapped children. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Goodman v. Georgia, (2006):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 7/05] -– addresses whether the American with Disabilities Act applies to conditions under which the disabled are held in state prisons. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Graham v. Florida and Sullivan v. Florida (Pending):
[Supreme Court of the United States/brief filed 7/09] -- Whether the fundamental principles in the US Supreme Court 2005 decision in Roper v. Simmons that declared the death penalty unconstitutional for juveniles should also be applied to sentences of life without the possibility of parole for those who committed crimes as juveniles (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief )

Greenberg v. National Geographic Enterprises (2008):
[U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit/brief filed 10/07] - Addresses the rights of scholarly publishers to digitize their present and past works. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003):
[U.S. Supreme Court /brief filed 2/18/03] -- this case addresses whether the University of Michigan's consideration of race in student admissions violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, or 42 U.S.C. 1981? (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. (1993):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 4/93] -- Whether a sexual harassment plaintiff must prove not only that the conduct complained of would have offended a reasonable victim, and that the plaintiff was in fact offended, but also that the conduct caused the plaintiff to suffer serious psychological injury. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Harris v. McRae (1980):
[US Supreme Court/APA signed onto a brief filed 7/80] -- Whether (1) a state participating in the Medicaid program were required to pay for medically necessary abortions and (2) Whether the Hyde Amendment denying federal reimbursement for such abortions was unconstitutional

Hartigan v. Zbaraz (1987):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 2/87] -- Whether the Illinois Parental Notice Abortion Act which required a physician to give 24-hour notice to both parents of a minor was unconstitutional. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hawthorne v. State of Florida (1985):
[Florida District Court of Appeals/brief filed 2/83] -- Whether expert testimony on battered women's syndrome is admissible to help establish claims of self-defense in a murder case (Parallels the New Jersey v. Kelly case). (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hedlund v. Superior Court of Orange County (1983):
[California Supreme Court/brief filed 10/83] -- Whether a "foreseeable" bystander in a close relationship to the victim of an assault by a patient can bring a cause of action against the patient's psychotherapist for emotional injury resulting from a failure to warn (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hernandez v. Robles (2005):
[New York, Appellate Division, First Department/Brief filed 8/05] -- addresses a constitutional challenge to New York’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hertzler v. Hertzler (1995):
[Wyoming Supreme Court/brief filed 12/94] -- Whether the "best interests of the child" is served by restricting visitation rights to a minimum level due to a mother's sexual orientation as a lesbian. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hodgson v. State of Minnesota (1988) & (1990):
[US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit/brief filed 3/87 & US Supreme Court/brief filed 9/89] -- Whether a Minnesota statute requiring physicians to notify the parents of all unemancipated minors under the age of 18 at least 48 hours before performing an abortion was unconstitutional (companion case to Ohio v. Akron) (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Horne v. Goodson Logging Co. (1986):
[North Carolina Court of Appeals/brief filed 8/86] -- Whether a neuropsychologist is competent and credible to testify as an expert determining neurological disability for the purposes of awarding monetary compensation (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hudgins v. Moore (1999):
[Supreme Court of South Carolina/briefs filed 2/98 and 2/99] -- Whether the prosecution could use raw MMPI-A test materials, administered to determine the defendant's competency to stand trial, to argue at trial that the defendant admitted to being a liar. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Huntoon v. TCI Cablevision of Colorado (1998):
[US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit/brief filed 7/97 & Colorado Supreme Court/brief filed 2/98] -- Whether a neuropsychologist is qualified to testify as to the causation of a head injury. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Hutchinson v. Proxmire (1979):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 2/79] -- Whether a research scientist is a "public figure" for the purposes of libel law if he is supported by public funds, thereby rendering it difficult for a scientist to sue for libel (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

In re Bryant (1988):
[District of Columbia Court of Appeals/brief filed 6/87] -- Whether involuntarily committed mental patients have the right to refuse anti-psychotic medication. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

In re. Adoption of Luke (2002):
[Nebraska Supreme Court/APA brief filed 9/01] -- this case involves an adoption proceeding commenced by the lesbian partner of a child's natural mother. The case challenges the issue that second-parent adoptions must be denied when the co-parents are gay or lesbian. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

In re Marriage Cases (2008):
[Supreme Court of California/brief filed 9/07] -- Whether prohibiting same-sex marriage discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, rather than just imposing disparate burdens on gay people. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

In re Matter of Adoption of X.X.G. and N.R.G. (Pending):
[District Court of Appeal, Third District, State of Florida/brief filed 6/09] -- Addresses a challenge to a Florida statute prohibiting adoption by gay or lesbian persons. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

In re. R.A. & M.A. (2007):
[Maine Supreme Judicial Court/brief filed 10/06] --  addresses a challenge to the Maine state law barring same-sex couples from legally adopting foster children for whom they are caring. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Insurance Board v. Muir (1987):
[US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit/brief filed 8/86] -- Whether employee benefit plans issued by private employers but administered by fiscal intermediaries are subject to ERISA or constitute the business of insurance, thus saving the state benefits laws from preemption (the main issue for psychology was whether ERISA exempts insurance carriers from complying with psychologists' freedom of choice laws and mandated mental-health benefit laws. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

International Primate Protection League v. Institute for Behavioral Research (1986):
[US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit/APA joined 69 scientific organizations filing a joint amici curiae brief filed 1986 -- Whether animal rights organizations have standing to sue for custody of a laboratory under state anti-cruelty to animals. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Jaffee v. Redmond (1996):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/96] -- Whether a psychotherapist-patient privilege was recognized under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a decision of the Seventh Circuit that recognized the existence of a psychotherapist-patient privilege and held that confidential communications of a police officer with a licensed social worker were protected from compelled disclosure. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Jegley v. Picado (2002):
[Arkansas Supreme Court/brief filed 10/01] -- addresses the constitutionality of an Arkansas law that makes sodomy between same-sex couples a crime. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Jenkins v. United States (1962):
[US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia/brief filed 2/62] -- Whether a psychologist is competent to state professional opinions as an expert witness concerning the nature, and existence or non-existence, of mental disease and defect. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Kentucky v. Stincer (1987):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/87] -- Whether a defendant accused of sexually abusing a child has the right to be present at a pretrial hearing at which a child is questioned to determine competence to testify at trial (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Kentucky v. Wasson (1992):
[Kentucky Supreme Court/brief filed 8/91] -- Whether Kentucky sodomy laws are constitutional under the Kentucky Constitution. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public Health (2008):
[Connecticut Supreme Court/brief filed 1/07] -- addresses a constitutional challenge to Connecticut’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Landers v. Chrysler Corporation (1997):
[Missouri Court of Appeals/brief filed 8/97] -- Whether a neuropsychologist is qualified to testify as to the causation of a head injury. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/16/03] -- addresses the constitutionality of a Texas law that makes sodomy between same-sex couples a crime. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Levy v. Edelhofer (2001):
[Fourth District Court of Appeal, State of California/briefs filed 11/13/00 & 12/4/00] -- the case presents the questions of: (1) whether the client/therapist privilege applies to the communications of therapist to the client, (2) whether a court should evaluate communications in therapy to decide whether they are "therapeutic" before deciding whether they are privileged, and (3) whether psychotherapists owe a general duty of care to third parties, or whether psychotherapists o (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)we a general duty of care to their patients' former therapists with whom they have no contractual relationship.

Lewis v. Harris (2005):
[Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division/brief filed 10/04] -– whether the New Jersey Constitution compels the State to allow same-sex couples to marry. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Li v. Oregon (2005):
[Supreme Court of the State of Oregon/brief filed 10/04] -– addresses a challenge to Oregon’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Lockhart v. McCree (1986):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 12/85] -- Whether the use of a death-qualified jury in a capital case is unconstitutional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Martin v. Benson (1988):
[North Carolina Supreme Court/brief filed 4/97] -- Whether a neuropsychologist is competent to testify as to whether the symptoms evidenced by a person are indications of a closed head injury. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Maryland v. Craig (1990):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 3/90] -- Whether certain procedural protections such as the use of one-way close circuit television may be afforded to the victims of child abuse when testifying against the accused individual. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

McCarver v. North Carolina (2001):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 6/8/01] -- this case addresses whether the Eighth Amendment's ban against cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the execution of individuals with mental. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Menendez v. State of California (1992):
[California Supreme Court/brief filed 10/91] -- Whether patient-therapist communications lose their privileged status once a patient threatens others in a manner such that the therapist's Tarasoff duties are triggered and when a therapist-patient relationship is terminated (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Metropolitan Edison Co. v. People Against Nuclear Energy (and United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. People Against Nuclear Energy) (1983):
[US Supreme Court/briefs filed 9/82 and 1/83] -- Whether there are situations in which an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act must consider the effects of a proposed action on psychological health. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. State of Massachusetts (and Travelers Insurance Co. v. State of Massachusetts) (1985):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/85] -- Whether a state law requiring mandatory minimal mental health benefits under which outpatient services could be provided by a licensed psychologist was preempted by the federal ERISA law. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Miller v. City of Poughkeepsie (1991):
[New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division/brief filed 12/91] -- Whether the State of New York and the federal government consider "medical treatment" to include services provided by a psychologist (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Mills v. Rogers (1983):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 1/83 and Massachusetts Supreme Court/brief filed 9/81] -- Whether a patient institutionalized in a state psychiatric facility has the right to refuse the administration of anti-psychotic medication

National Kidney Patients Association v. Sullivan (1993):
[US Supreme Court brief in support of a petition for certiorari/brief filed 12/92] -- Whether health care providers and Medicare beneficiaries may seek judicial review of HCFA regulations without first completing lengthy administrative review process by HCFA (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

New Jersey v. Kelly (1984):
[New Jersey Supreme Court/brief filed 4/83] -- Whether expert testimony on battered women's syndrome is admissible to help establish claims of self-defense in a murder case (Parallels case of Hawthorne v. Florida). (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

New York v. Uplinger (1984):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 12/83] -- Whether a New York Loitering law that prohibited loitering for the purpose of engaging in "deviate" sexual intercourse was unconstitutional
(Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, Inc. (and Hodgson v. State of Minnesota) (1990):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 9/89] -- Whether an Ohio statute which prohibited a physician from performing an abortion upon a minor unless notice was provided to one of the minor's parents. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Olmstead v. L.C. (1999):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 3/99] -- Whether the Americans With Disabilities Act compels a state to provide treatment for mentally disabled patients in a community placement rather than a state mental institution when that is an appropriate treatment option (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Oregon v. Miller (1985):
[Oregon Supreme Court/brief filed 12/84] -- Whether psychotherapist-patient privilege extended to a receptionist and to statements made to a psychiatrist that were not for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Panetti v. Quarterman (2007):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 2/07] – at issue is the appropriate standard for determining the level of mental illness that should preclude execution, as well as the issue of how to define the factors that should be assessed in such a case. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Parents v. Seattle School District and Meredith v. Jefferson Co. Board of Education (2007):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 10/06] -- the consolidated cases involve voluntary desegregation plans in Kentucky and Seattle K-12 public school systems that use race as a factor in some instances when assigning children to particular schools or programs within schools. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Patrick v. Burget (1989):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 11/87] -- Whether the conduct of hospital peer committees with the power to grant hospital privileges were absolutely immune from antitrust liability under the state action doctrine

Penry v. Lynaugh (1988):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 9/88] -- Whether mentally retarded individuals possess the moral culpability to be subjected to the death penalty. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

People v. Gil (1998):
[New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division/brief filed 7/97] -- Whether cognitive research evidence and expert testimony regarding laypersons' beliefs concerning physics was admissible in a murder trial (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 3/92] -- Whether (1) the challenged provisions of Pennsylvania's abortion statute are constitutional, and (2) the standard of review established under Roe v. Wade for regulations restricting abortion remained the law of the land (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1989):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 6/88]-- Whether social psychological research and expert testimony regarding sex-role stereotyping is sufficient to support a finding of sex-discrimination in a Title VII (mixed motivation) case (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) v. University of Washington (1994):
[Washington Supreme Court/brief filed 7/93] -- Whether unfunded grant proposals submitted to a federal agency are protected from disclosure by federal preemption and the researcher's First Amendment right of academic freedom. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Riese v. St. Mary's Hospital & Medical Center (1988):
[California Supreme Court/brief filed 8/88] -- Whether civilly committed mental patients could refuse the administration of antipsychotic medication absent a judicial determination of incompetence. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Rivers v. Katz (and Grassi v. Acrish) (1986):
[New York Court of Appeals/brief filed 2/86] -- Whether involuntarily committed mental patients, who have not been formally adjudicated to be incompetent, can refuse antipsychotic medication. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Romer v. Evans (1996):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 6/95] -- Whether an enacted state constitutional amendment prohibiting the State and all local governmental entities from enacting, adopting or enforcing any law or policy protecting lesbians, gay men and bisexuals from discrimination violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it burdens the fundamental right of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals to seek such legal protections. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Rone v. Fireman (1979):
[US District Ct., Northern District, Eastern Div./brief filed 1//78] -- Whether the State had an obligation to treat persons confined to state mental hospitals in the least restrictive setting. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Roper v. Simmons (2005):
[US Supreme Court/filed 7/04] – Whether the imposition of the death penalty on an individual who was 17 years old when he committed a murder constitutes “cruel and unusual” punishment, and is thus barred by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Samuels v. New York State Department of Health (2006):
[New York Appellate Division: Third Department/Brief filed 5/05] - - addresses a constitutional challenge to New York’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Schudel v. General Electric (1997):
[US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit/brief filed 7/95] -- Whether neuropsychologists are competent to testify on issues pertaining to causation of an "organic" mental condition. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Sell v. U.S., 539 U.S. 166 (2003):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 12/19/02] -- this case addresses whether a criminal defendant should be involuntary medicated for the purpose of restoring the defendant to competency so that he can stand trial. (Read the Full-Text Amicus Brief, PDF format, 2.05 MB) (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Shields v. Madigan (2006):
[New York Appellate Division: Second Department/Brief filed 7/05] -- addresses a constitutional challenge to New York’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Smith v. Murray (1986):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 12/85 under Smith v. Sielaff] -- Whether information the defendant provides to a mental health professional for the purpose of diagnosis or assessment incident to preparing a defense to a charge of a capital offense can be used against him by the State to establish an aggravating circumstance during the death penalty phase (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Soroka v. Dayton Hudson Corp, d.b.a. Target Stores (1992):
[California Supreme Court/APA filed 1/92 letter in support of cert. petition. Although review was granted, the case was settled in 7/93 without an APA brief filed] -- Whether certain portions of the MMPI and the California Psychological Inventory administered to job applicants (i.e., questions that facially and in isolation suggest they are related to religious and sexual matters) violate the privacy provisions of the California Constitution and certain anti-discrimination laws (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003):
[U.S. Supreme Court /brief filed 2/18/03] -- this case involves the validity of a California statute that retroactively expanded the statute of limitations for certain sex offenses (i.e., the rape and molestation of children by. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Stover v. State of Georgia (1986):
[Georgia Supreme Court/brief filed 11/86] -- Whether a state anti-sodomy law criminally prohibiting oral sex was constitutional. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Texas v. Morales (1994):
[Texas Court of Appeals/brief filed 1/92 and Texas Supreme Court/brief filed 12/92] -- Whether the equal protection and due process components of the Texas Constitution prohibit criminalization of consensual homosexual sodomy among adults in private. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986):
[US Supreme Court/brief filed 8/85] -- Whether a Pennsylvania state law that required physicians to inform women contemplating an abortion of the detrimental physical and psychological effects was constitutional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

U.S. v. Fields (2007):
[US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit/brief filed 4/05] -– addresses the reliability of expert testimony in a death penalty case (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

U.S. v. Gomes (2002):
[US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit/brief filed 9/01] -- addresses Whether a criminal defendant can be involuntarily medicated in order to restore the defendant to competency (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

U.S. v. Leatherman (1984):
[U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia/brief filed 11/83] (case dismissed when Leatherman escaped from hospital in 2/84) -- addresses Whether a prisoner found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed for treatment can refuse antipsychotic medications (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

U.S. v. Lyons (1984):
[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District/brief filed 11/83] -- Whether evidence of drug addiction should be admitted when the defendant raises an insanity defense (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

United States v. Brawner (1972):
[US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia/brief filed 5/71] - Whether in insanity defense cases (1) the medical model should be abandoned, and (2) the results of psychological tests like the Rorschach should be admissible (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

United States v. Byers (1982):
[US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia/brief filed 10/81] -- Whether a prosecution-requested, court-ordered clinical interview conducted in custodial confinement of a criminal defendant who was offering an insanity defense endangered the privilege against self-incrimination protected by the Fifth Amendment and the right to assistance of counsel protected by the Sixth Amendment. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

United States v. Charters (1988):
[US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit/brief filed 6/88] -- Whether a hospitalized patient has a federal constitutional right to refuse antipsychotic drugs unless the patient has been found incompetent to make treatment decisions or is imminently dangerous to self or others. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Varnum v. Brien (2009):
[Iowa Supreme Court/brief filed 5/08] - Addresses a constitutional challenge to Iowa’s refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Virginia Academy of Clinical Psychologists v. Blue Shield of Virginia (1980):
[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit/brief filed 7/79] -- Whether a health insurance company's refusal to provide direct payments to clinical psychologists for outpatient psychological services rendered to the company's subscribers unless those services were ordered, supervised, and billed by a physician violated the Sherman Act and "Virginia's "freedom of choice" legislation (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Washington v. Harper (1990):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 6/89] -- Whether a prisoner in a correctional facility has the right to refuse the administration of psychotropic drugs (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Watkins v. United States Army (1989):
[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit/brief filed 8/88] -- Whether US Army regulations requiring the discharge of lesbians and gay men and barring them from reenlisting were unconstitutional

Watson v. Fort Worth Bank and Trust (1988):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 9/87] -- Whether the use of non-validated employment assessment tools violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 3/89] -- Whether a state statute that comprehensively regulated abortion was unconstitutional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Williamson v. Liptzen, 539 S.E. 2d 313 (2000):
[Court of Appeals of North Carolina/brief filed 2/00] -- Whether public policy supports the extension of the law of proximate causation to allow liability in this case concerning negligence by a mental health professional (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Wright v. Pennsylvania (pending 2008):
[Supreme Court of Pennsylvania/brief filed 11/08] - involves the lower courts’ interpretation that the Post Conviction DNA testing statute (which governs when convicted felons can have potentially exonerating DNA tests performed) does not allow access to DNA testing, if there has been a “voluntary” confession in the case. (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Wyatt v. Aderholt (1973):
[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit/brief filed 11/72] -- Whether (1) mentally impaired individuals who are involuntarily confined in state institutions have the right to treatment and (2) confinement without treatment deprives such individuals of their constitutional rights (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)

Youngberg v. Romeo (1982):
[U.S. Supreme Court/brief filed 9/81) -- Whether mentally retarded residents of state hospitals have the constitutional right to be free from undue bodily restraint, the right to personal security and protection, and the right to adequate treatment (Read Full-Text Amicus Brief)