A judiciary rules committee is currently deliberating over whether to abolish the mandate asking amici to procure consent from the parties or the court’s approval prior to filing briefs, a move already made by the U.S. Supreme Court last year.
However, a federal appellate judge made it clear on Thursday that eliminating the requirement obligating courts to approve briefs might instigate recusal complications. According to Ninth Circuit Judge Sidney Thomas, if court’s permission becomes unnecessary, amici could potentially file briefs with an intention to disqualify a specific judge.
The ongoing evaluation by the judiciary rules committee and its potential consequences opens the discussion to the balance between encouraging public participation in court proceedings and maintaining judicial impartiality.
For more detailed information regarding Judge Thomas’s viewpoint and the ongoing assessment, you can read it here.