PLF HAS BEEN a consistent presence before the U.S. Supreme Court since opening our doors in 1973—we have a record unmatched among our peers. Importantly, we are increasing our presence at the Court: the justices have ruled on the merits in five of our cases since 2012, and we have filed a remarkable nine petitions asking the Court to hear new cases so far this term. Add to that the dozens of friend-of-the-court briefs filed in support of individual liberty and the principles of limited government in others’ cases during the past few years alone.
PLF’s pace of activity before the high court places it among the small group of elite law firms that can be said to have a dedicated and successful Supreme Court practice.
Getting a case to the Supreme Court is a rare thing for any firm. Supreme Court review “is not a matter of right, but of judicial discretion,” according to the Court’s rules. Unlike the federal Courts of Appeals, the Supreme Court doesn’t exist simply to correct an error or injustice; it only accepts a case to resolve matters of national significance or to ensure that the law is applied consistently throughout the country. The Court typically receives more than 7 thousand petitions for review each year— and grants a hearing in fewer than 100 of those cases.
Studies show that fewer than 70 of the nearly 20,000 private attorneys who have filed petitions in the past decade make up a true Supreme Court bar—attorneys who have outsized success persuading the Court to take up their cases and who repeatedly appear before it. It is a field dominated by former solicitors general and former Supreme Court clerks who work at some of the nation’s largest and most expensive law firms. Yet PLF, fueled by idealism and the generosity of its donors, is often noted as a ranking force in surveys of Supreme Court practice.
Moreover, unlike the commercial firms that traditionally top the Supreme Court bar, PLF is laser-focused on a mission to bring cases that expand liberty and hold government agencies accountable to the Constitution.
PLF has succeeded in part because we are strategic. We often litigate multiple, similar cases in courts across the country, which can ultimately surface conflicting rulings between different appellate courts— conflicts that only the Supreme Court can resolve. We also select cases with sympathetic clients whose hardships are easily understood, which may create interest at the Court.
There is evidence that clerks and members of the Court itself are taking notice of PLF, too. In a speech last month before lawyers and judges in California, for instance, Justice Anthony Kennedy called us out in particular among public interest law firms for “turn[ing] in very, very fine briefs.” We will continue to do so, making the case for liberty at the U.S. Supreme Court.