Since its founding in 1971, Americans United for Life has protected and defended human life in American courts and before international tribunals. After a pro-life bill is passed and signed into law, organizations such as Planned Parenthood, the ACLU, and the Center for Reproductive Rights routinely file a lawsuit challenging the law. AUL works with state legal offices, pro-life healthcare groups, and other allies to defend these laws by offering invaluable legal expertise, as well as filing briefs in federal and state courts.
AUL has been actively involved in every abortion-related case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Harris v. McRae, AUL attorneys successfully defended the Hyde Amendment, ensuring that federal and state governments do not have to fund elective abortions. AUL’s court briefs have played a key role in upholding common-sense health and safety regulations of abortion providers, protecting the conscience rights of health care professionals, and preventing the judicial recognition of suicide by physician.
Briefs
United States Supreme Court
- 2024– Food & Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (on behalf of AUL)
- 2024– Food & Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (on behalf of 145 Members of the United States Congress)
- 2024– Moyle, Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives v. United States; Idaho v. United States (on behalf of 121 Members of Congress)
- 2023- Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration (conditional cross-petition) (on behalf of 109 Members of the United States Congress)
- 2023– Vitagliano v. County of Westchester, New York (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2023– Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine; U.S. Food & Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (applications for stay) (on behalf of 147 members of the United States Congress)
- 2022- Kerr v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc. (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (on behalf of 228 members of the United States Congress)
- 2021- Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Rutledge v. Little Rock Family Planning Services (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Americans for Prosperity v. Becerra (on Behalf of AUL and the Thomas More Society)
- 2020- Baker v. Planned Parenthood of South Atlantic (on behalf of AUL)
- 2020- Box v. Planned Parenthood Indiana and Kentucky (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2020- Gee v. June Medical Services LLC; June Medical Services LLC v. Gee (on behalf of 207 members of the United States Congress)
- 2020- Gee v. June Medical Services LLC; June Medical Services LLC v. Gee (on behalf of Americans United for Life)
- 2019- Price v. City of Chicago (cert petition) (on behalf of 40 Days for Life & Sidewalk Advocates for Life)
- 2019- Gee v. June Medical Services (conditional cross petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2019- Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky (cert petition) (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, American College of Pediatricians, Care Net, Christian Medical Association, Heartbeat International, Inc., and National Institute of Family & Life Advocates)
- 2018- Commissioner, Indiana State Department of Health v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana & Kentucky (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL and Charlotte Lozier Institute)
- 2018- Gee v. Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast (cert petition) (on behalf of 90 Members of Congress)
- 2018- Andersen v. Planned Parenthood of Kansas & Mid-Missouri (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2018- First Resort, Inc. v. Herrera (cert petition) (on behalf of Heartbeat International)
- 2018- NIFLA v. Becerra (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, the American College of Pediatricians, and the Christian Medical Association)
- 2016- Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (on behalf of more than 450 Bipartisan and Bicameral State Legislators and Lieutenant Governors)
- 2016- Zubik v. Burwell (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of
Pro Life Nurses, National Association of Catholic Nurses, and The National Catholic Bioethics Center) - 2015- Priests for Life v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (cert petition) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, Alabama Physicians for Life, National Association of
Pro Life Nurses, and National Association of Catholic Nurses) - 2014- Peggy Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (on behalf of 23 joining organizations)
- 2014- Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.; Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius (on behalf of Drury Development Corporation, Drury Southwest, Inc., and Drury Hotels Company, LLC, with the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of
Pro Life Nurses, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, and National Association of Catholic Nurses) - 2013- Isaacson v. Horne (cert petition) (on behalf of Tom Horne, Attorney General of Arizona, and William Gerard, County Attorney for Maricopa County)
- 2013- Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius (cert petition) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- McCullen v. Coakley (on behalf of 40 Days for Life)
- 2013- Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice (cert petition) (on behalf of 79 Oklahoma Legislators)
- 2012- U.S. Department of Health & Human Services v. Florida (on behalf of American College of Pediatricians, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of
Pro Life Nurses, and Medical Students for Life of America) - 2009- McCullen v. Coakley (cert petition) (on behalf of 40 Days for Life)
- 2006- Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, U.S. Senator Dr. Tom Coburn, and U.S. Representatives Dr. Michael Burgess, Dr. Phil Gingrey, Dr. Dave Weldon, Dr. C. Everett Koop, and Dr. Edmund D. Pellegrino)
- 2006- Gonzales v. Carhart (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, U.S. Representatives, C. Everett Koop, Edmund Pellegrino)
- 2005- Scheidler v. National Organization for Women (on behalf of AUL)
- 2005- Scheidler v. National Organization for Women; Operation Rescue v. National Organization for Women, Inc. (on behalf of AUL)
- 2005- Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England (on behalf of New Hampshire legislators, including bill sponsor Representative Kathleen Souza)
- 2005- Gonzales v. Oregon (on behalf of AUL)
- 2002- Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc.; Operation Rescue v. National Organization for Women, Inc. (on behalf of AUL)
- 2000- Stenberg v. Carhart (on behalf of Louisiana & Mississippi)
- 1996- Vacco v. Quill; Washington v. Glucksberg (on behalf of Members of the New York and Washington State Legislatures)
- 1993- National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler (on behalf of Respondents Joseph M. Scheidler, Andrew Scholberg, and the Pro-Life Action League, Inc.)
- 1992- National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler (brief in opposition) (on behalf of Respondents Joseph M. Scheidler, Timothy Murphy, Andrew Scholberg, and the Pro-Life Action League, Inc.)
- 1992- Ada v. Guam
Ob Gyn Society (on behalf of the Territory of Guam) - 1992- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (on behalf of University Faculty for Life)
- 1992- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (on behalf of U.S. Representative Henry Hyde and other Members of Congress)
- 1992- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (on behalf of 600 state senators and representatives)
- 1991- Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic (on behalf of Feminists for Life, et. al.)
- 1990- Rust v. Sullivan; New York v. Sullivan (on behalf of the Association of American Physicians &Surgeons)
- 1989- Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (on behalf of the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons)
- 1989- Hodgson v. Minnesota (on behalf of the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons)
- 1989- Turnock v. Ragsdale (on behalf of certain Illinois Senators and Representatives)
- 1989- Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (on behalf of certain American state legislators)
- 1989- Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (on behalf of the American Association of
Prolife Obstetricians & Gynecologists and the American Association of Pro-Life Pediatricians) - 1989- Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes (on behalf of AUL Legal Defense Fund)
- 1989- Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (on behalf of Focus on the Family and Family Research
Counsel ) - 1989- Cruzan v. Harmon v. McCanse (on behalf of
Association of American Physicians & Surgeons and Dr. C. Everett Koop, et al.) - 1989- Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes (on behalf of AUL Legal Defense Fund)
- 1988- Diamond v. Charles (cert petition) (on behalf of Petitioner Dr. Eugene F. Diamond)
- 1988- Bowen v. Kendrick (on behalf of United Families of America)
- 1987- Kendrick v. Bowen (response to
jurisdictional statement) (on behalf of Cross-Appellee United Families of America) - 1987- Bowen v. Kendrick (memorandum) (on behalf of Appellee United Families of America)
- 1986- Hartigan v. Zbaraz (on behalf of AUL Legal Defense Fund)
- 1985- Federal Election Commission v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Inc. (on behalf of Joseph M. Scheidler and the Pro-Life Action League, Inc.)
- 1985- Heckler v. American Hospital Association (later Bowen v. American Hospital Association) (on behalf of Dr. David G. McLone, et al.)
- 1985- Diamond v. Charles (on behalf of Appellants Dr. Eugene F. Diamond and Dr. Jasper F. Williams)
- 1985- Diamond v. Charles (jurisdictional statement) (on behalf of Appellants Dr. Eugene F. Diamond and Dr. Jasper F. Williams)
- 1983- Infant Doe v. Bloomington Hospital (cert petition) (on behalf of Petitioner Infant Doe)
- 1982- Ashcroft v. Planned Parenthood Association of Kansas City, Missouri, Inc. (on behalf of AUL)
- 1982- Simopoulos v. Virginia (on behalf of AUL)
- 1982- City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (on behalf of AUL)
- 1982- City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (on behalf of Feminists for Life)
- 1982- City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (on behalf of Womankind, Inc.)
- 1980- H—— L—— v. Matheson (on behalf of AUL)
- 1980- Harris v. McRae (reply) (on behalf of Intervening Defendants-Appellees James L. Buckley, Jesse A. Helms, Henry J. Hyde, and Isabella Pernicone)
- 1980- Harris v. McRae (on behalf of Intervening Defendants-Appellees James L. Buckley, Jesse A. Helms, Henry J. Hyde, and Isabella Pernicone)
- 1979- Williams v. Zbaraz (reply) (on behalf of Intervening Defendants-Appellants Dr. Jasper F. Williams and Dr. Eugene F. Diamond)
- 1979- Williams v. Zbaraz (on behalf of Intervening Defendants-Appellants Dr. Jasper F. Williams and Dr. Eugene F. Diamond)
- 1979- Williams v. Zbaraz (jurisdictional statement) (on behalf of Intervening Defendants-Appellants Dr. Jasper F. Williams and Dr. Eugene F. Diamond)
- 1979- Bellotti v. Baird II (on behalf of AUL)
- 1978- Bellotti v. Baird; Hunderwadel v. Baird (on behalf of AUL and Dr. Eugene F. Diamond)
- 1978- Colautti v. Franklin (on behalf of AUL)
- 1978- Carey v. Wynn (jurisdictional statement) (on behalf of Appellant Dr. Eugene F. Diamond)
- 1978- Beal v. Franklin (on behalf of AUL)
- 1976- Maher v. Roe (on behalf of AUL)
- 1976- Califano & Buckley v. McRae (brief in opposition) (on behalf of Intervenors-Appellants James L. Buckley, et al.)
- 1976- Buckley v. McRae; Buckley v. New York Icy Health & Hospitals Corp. (jurisdictional statement) (on behalf of Intervenors-Appellants James L. Buckley, et al.)
- 1976- Poelker v. Doe (cert petition) (on behalf of AUL)
- 1976- Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth; Danforth v. Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri (on behalf of Dr. Eugene Diamond and AUL)
- 1973- Doe v. Bolton (on behalf of AUL, Certain physicians, Professors & Fellows, et. al.)
- 1973- Roe v. Wade (on behalf of AUL, Certain physicians, Professors & Fellows, et. al.)
- 1971- Roe v. Wade (in support of the Appellee)
- 1970- United States v. Vuitch (on behalf of Dr. Bart Heffernan)
Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
- 2024 – GenBioPro v. Raynes (on behalf of AUL)
- 2023- State of Texas v. Becerra (5th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2023– Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration (5th Circuit) (on behalf of 94 members of the United States Congress)
- 2023– Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food & Drug Administration (motion for a stay) (5th Circuit) (on behalf of 69 members of the United States Congress)
- 2022- State of Ohio v. Becerra (6th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2022- Frederick Douglass Foundation v. District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Noem (8th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Noem (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Heartbeat International)
- 2021- Reproductive Health Services of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region, Inc v. Parson (On behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Planned Parenthood Federation of America v. Center for Medical Progress (9th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2020- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists v. United States Food and Drug Administration (4th Circuit) (on behalf of 102 members of Congress)
- 2020- Hopkins v. Jegley (8th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2019- Essential Access Health v. Azar (9th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2019- California v. Azar (9th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2019- Oregon v. Azar (9th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2019- Washington v. Azar (9th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2019- Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas v. Phillips (en banc) (5th Circuit) (on behalf of 77 Members of Congress)
- 2018- Planned Parenthood of Arkansas & Eastern Oklahoma v. Jegley (8th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2018- Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio v. Himes (en banc) (6th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2017- National Institute of Family & Life Advocates v. Rauner (7th Circuit) (on behalf of American Association of Pro-life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, American College of Pediatricians, Christian Medical Association, and Heartbeat International)
- 2017- Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc., v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore PCC, et al. (4th Circuit) (on behalf of Care Net)
- 2015- Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, Inc. v. Schimel (7th Circuit) (on behalf of Legislators from the States of Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas)
- 2015- The School of the Ozarks, Inc. v. RightCHOICE Managed Care, Inc. (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, Alabama Physicians for Life, National Association of Pro-Life Nurses, and National Association of Catholic Nurses)
- 2014- Gonzalez ex rel. U.S. v. Planned Parenthood of Los Angeles (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Concerned Women for America)
- 2014- Eternal World Television Network v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (11th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of Americans Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, The National Catholic Bioethics Center, Alabama Physicians for Life, National Association of Prof Life Nurses, and National Association of Catholic Nurses)
- 2014- Reaching Souls International v. Sebelius (10th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of Pro-Life Nurses, National Association of Catholic Nurses, and The National Catholic Bioethics Center)
- 2014- Stuart v. Camnitz (4th Circuit) (on behalf of Law Professors)
- 2014- Planned Parenthood of Arizona v. Humble (9th Circuit) (on behalf of 32 Arizona Legislators)
- 2013- Jackson Women’s Health Organization v. Currier (5th Circuit) (on behalf of Members of the Alabama House of Representatives, Texas House of Representatives, and Texas Senate)
- 2013- Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Services v. Abbott (5th Circuit) (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of Pro Life Nurses, National Association of Catholic Nurses, and The National Catholic Bioethics Center)
- 2013- Beckwith Electric Co. v. Sebelius (11th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Domino’s Farms Corp. v. Sebelius (6th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Armstrong v. Sebelius (10th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians &Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Eden Foods, Inc. v. Sebelius (6th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Gilardi v. Sebelius (D.C. Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Legatus v. Sebelius (6th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Liberty University v. Geithner (4th Circuit) (on behalf of Alliance Defending Freedom, AUL, Maryland Family Alliance, North Carolina Family Policy Council, Palmetto Family Council, Virginia Family Foundation, and West Virginia Family Policy Council
- 2013- Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius (3rd Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Annex Medical, Inc. v. Sebelius (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Newland v. Sebelius (10th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2013- Autocam Corp. v. Sebelius (6th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, the National Catholic Bioethics Center, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2013- Hobby Lobby Stores v. Sebelius (10th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, the National Catholic Bioethics Center, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2013- Cyril Korte v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services; Grote Industries LLC v. Sebelius (7th Circuit) Drury (on behalf of Development Corporation, Drury Southwest, Inc., and Drury Hotels Company, LLC, and the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, the National Catholic Bioethics Center, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2013- Planned Parenthood v. Betlach (9th Circuit) (on behalf of 29 AZ legislators)
- 2012- Stormans v. Selecky (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Members of the U.S. Congress)
- 2012- O’Brien v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2012- Nebraska v. Sebelius (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2012- Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius; Wheaton College v. Sebelius (D.C. Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2012- Isaacson v. Horne (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Association of American Physicians & Surgeons, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2012- Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore (en banc) (4th Circuit) (on behalf of Care Net, Heartbeat International, National Institute of Family & Life Advocates, and PCCs in Maryland)
- 2012- Children First Foundation v. Fiala (2nd Circuit) (on behalf of New York State pregnancy care centers and national organizations Care Net, Heart International, and National Institute of Family & Life Advocates)
- 2012- Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region v. DeWine (6th Circuit) (on behalf of U.S. Senator and Representatives)
- 2012- Evergreen Association, Inc. v. City of New York (2nd Circuit) (on behalf of Care Net, Heartbeat International, and National Institute of Family & Life Advocates)
- 2011- Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Christian Medical & Dental Associations, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2011- Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc. v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore (4th Circuit) (on behalf of Care Net, Heartbeat International, National Institute of Family & Life Advocates, and PCCs in Maryland)
- 2010- Cenzon-DeCarlo v. Mount Sinai Hospital (2nd Circuit) (on behalf of National Association of Pro Life Nurses, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Physicians for Life, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, and Catholic Medical Association)
- 2010- Tucson Women’s Center v. Arizona Medical Board (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Arizona legislators)
- 2009- Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota v. Rounds (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Christian Medical & Dental Associations, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, and National Association of Pro-Life Nurses)
- 2008- Stormans v. Selecky (9th Circuit) (on behalf of State Washington Legislators)
- 2008- Roach v. Vincent (8th Circuit) (on behalf of 9 pregnancy centers in Missouri)
- 2008- Richmond Medical Center for Women v. Herring (4th Circuit) (on behalf of Virginia Delegates Robert G. Marshall, Kathy J. Byron, M. Kirkland Cox, Thomas D. Gear, William J. Howell, Timothy D. Huge, L. Scott Lingamfelter, Samuel A. Nixon, Jr., Brenda L. Pogge, and R. Lee Ware, Jr.; Virginia Senator Jill Holtzman Vogel; and U.S. Senator Dr. Tom Coburn)
- 2007- Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region v. Strickland (6th Circuit) (on behalf of U.S. Senator and Representatives)
- 2007- Choose Life Illinois v. White (7th Circuit) (on behalf of 18 pregnancy centers in Illinois)
- 2006- Roe v. Crawford (8th Circuit) (on behalf of Missouri State Senators Chuck Gross and Delbert Scott)
- 2006- Northland Family Planning Clinic v. Cox (6th Circuit) (on behalf of Michigan Senators and Representatives)
- 2006- National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association v. Gonzales (DC Circuit) (on behalf of Representatives Henry Hyde, Dave Weldon, Todd Akin, Charles Pickering, C.L. “Butch” Otter, Mark Souder, Steve King, Jo Ann Davis, and Jim Ryun; the American Center for Law & Justice; AUL Center for Rights of Conscience; and the Fellowship of Christian Physician Assistants)
- 2006- National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association v. Gonzales (DC Circuit) (on behalf of Representatives Henry Hyde, Dave Weldon, Todd Akin, Charles Pickering, C.L. “Butch” Otter, and Mark Souder; the American Center for Law & Justice; AUL Center for Rights of Conscience; and the Fellowship of Christian Physician Assistants)
- 2006- Arizona Life Coalition v. Stanton (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Women’s Choice Pregnancy Clinic)
- 2006- Aid for Women v. Foulston (10th Circuit) (on behalf of Kansas Legislators)
- 2005- National Abortion Federation v. Ashcroft (2nd Circuit) (on behalf of Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline)
- 2003- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants’ combined reply) (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2003- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants’ combined response and opening brief) (9th Circuit) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 1998- Karlin v. Foust (7th Circuit) (on behalf of Certain Members of the Wisconsin Legislature)
- 1993- Fargo Women’s Health Organ. v. Schafer (8th Circuit) (on behalf of AUL)
- 1992- Sojourner T. v. Edwards (5th Circuit) (on behalf of Louisiana State Legislators)
- 1990- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (Third Circuit) (on behalf of American Academy of Medical Ethics)
- 1986- Ragsdale v. Turnock (Seventh Circuit) (on behalf of AUL Legal Defense Fund)
Federal District Courts
- 2023- Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (N.D. Texas) (on behalf of 67 members of the United States Congress)
- 2019- Family Planning Association of Maine v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (D. Maine) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on unlawful delegation claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on vagueness claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on undue burden claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on informational privacy claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on Fourth Amendment claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on equal protection claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (reply in support of Defendants’ summary judgment motions) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint response to amended supplemental statement of facts; Defendants’ joint motion to preclude) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ amended joint response to amended statement of facts; Defendants’ joint motion to preclude) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden Defendants’ joint response to motion to strike) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint response to statement of facts in support of motion for summary judgment) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint response to motion for summary judgment) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on unlawful delegation claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on vagueness claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on undue burden claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on informational privacy claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on Fourth Amendment claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (Defendants’ joint motion for partial summary judgment on equal protection claim) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 2001- Tucson Woman’s Clinic v. Eden (memorandum re summary judgment motions) (D. Arizona) (on behalf of Defendant Richard M. Romley)
- 1991- Sojourner T. v. Roemer (E.D. Louisiana) (on behalf of Louisiana State Legislators)
State Supreme Courts
- 2023– Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. v. Mayes (AZ) (merits) (on behalf of Center for Arizona Policy)
- 2023– Planned Parenthood Arizona, Inc. v. Mayes (AZ) (petition for review) (on behalf of Center for Arizona Policy)
- 2022- Zimmerman v. City of Austin (TX) (merits) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2022- Kligler v. Healey (MA) (on behalf of Christian Medical & Dental Associations)
- 2021- Zimmerman v. City of Austin (TX) (petition for review) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2021- Allegheny Reproductive Health Center v. Pennsylvania Department of Human Services (PA) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2013- MKB Management v. Burdick (ND) (on behalf of 49 North Dakota Legislators)
- 2013- Planned Parenthood of Montana v. State of Montana (MT) (on behalf of Montana Family Foundation and AULA)
- 2013- Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice (OK) (on behalf of 83 Oklahoma Legislators and AULA)
- 2013- Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest v. Alaska (AK) (on behalf of Alaska Family Action)
- 2013- Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice v. Cline (OK) (on behalf of 57 state legislators, including bill sponsors Sen. Treat and Rep. Grau)
- 2011- Hope Clinic for Women LTD. v. Adams (IL) (on behalf of Illinois legislators)
- 2010- In re: Jane Doe (PA) (on behalf of Pennsylvania Family Institute and Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation)
- 2009- Baxter v. State of Montana (MT) (on behalf of Coalition of 28 Bi-Partisan Montana Legislators)
- 2008- Rogers v. Planned Parenthood Cincinnati Region (OH) (on behalf of Members of the U.S. Congress)
- 2008- Roe v. Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region (OH) (on behalf of Members of the U.S. Congress from the State of Ohio)
- 2007- North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group v. Superior Court of San Diego County, Benitez (CA) (on behalf of Christian Medical & Dental Associations, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, and Physicians for Life)
- 2007- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (IL) (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2007- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (petition) (IL) (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2007- Doe v. Arpaio (AZ) (on behalf of Arizona Representative Sam Crump)
- 2004- Alaska v. Planned Parenthood of Alaska (AK) (on behalf of AUL)
- 1993- Hope v. Perales (NY Court of Appeals) (on behalf the New York State Catholic Conference)
- 1991- Stowe v. Davis (TN) (on behalf of the American Academy of Medical Ethics)
- 1990- Hope v. Perales (NY) (on behalf of the New York State Catholic Conference)
- 1990- Virginia P. v. Rathbun (CA) (on behalf of Petitioners Virginia P. and Erin G.)
- 1987- Rasmussen v. Fleming (AZ) (on behalf of AUL)
- 1980- Moe v. Secretary of Admin. & Finance (MA) (on behalf of AUL)
Other State Courts
- 2012- Morr-Fitz v. Quinn (IL Appellate Court) (on behalf of American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Christian Medical & Dental Associations, Catholic Medical Association, Physicians for Life, National Association of Pro Life Nurses)
- 2010- The Hope Clinic for Women v. Adams (IL Appellate Court) (on behalf of Illinois legislators)
- 2008- Coalition Against Assisted Suicide v. Washington (WA Superior Court) (on behalf of John E. Peyton, Jr., Patricia Peyton, and Washington State Catholic Medical Association)
- 2007- Kansas v. Tiller (KS District Court) (on behalf of Kansas Senators and Representatives)
- 2007- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (petition for rehearing) (IL Appellate Court) (on behalf of Plaintiffs-Appellants Morr-Ftiz, Inc., et al.)
- 2006- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (reply) (IL Appellate Court) (on behalf of Plaintiffs-Appellants Morr-Ftiz, Inc., et al.)
- 2006- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (IL Appellate Court) (on behalf of Plaintiffs-Appellants Morr-Ftiz, Inc., et al.)
- 2005- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (preliminary injunction motion) (IL Circuit Court) (on behalf of Plaintiffs Morr-Ftiz, Inc., et al.)
- 2005- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (first amended complaint) (IL Circuit Court) (on behalf of Plaintiffs Morr-Ftiz, Inc., et al.)
- 2005- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (preliminary injunction motion) (IL Circuit Court) (on behalf of Plaintiff Morr-Ftiz, Inc.)
- 2005- Morr-Fitz v. Blagojevich (complaint) (IL Circuit Court) (on behalf of Plaintiff Morr-Ftiz, Inc.)
- 2005- North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group v. Superior Court of San Diego County, Benitez (CA Appellate Court) (on behalf of Christian Medical & Dental Associations)
- 1993- Hobbins v. Attorney-General of Michigan (MI Court of Appeals) (on behalf of certain Michigan State Senators and Representatives)
- 1991- In re Christine Busalacchi v. Busalacchi (MO Court of Appeals) (on behalf of Dr. Edmund Pellegrino, Dr. Leon R. Kass, Dr. Mark A. Siegler, Dr. Fred Rosner, Dr. William J. Burke, and Leslie Steven Rothenberg.
- 1991- People of the State of Illinois v. Campos (IL Appellate Court) (On behalf of Senator Kelly, Representatives Pullen, and Fourteen other Members of the Illinois General Assembly)
- 1989- Doe v. Babcock & Right to Life of Michigan (MI Court of Appeals) (on behalf of Michigan Senators and Representatives)
- 1986- State v. Evans (TN Court of Criminal Appeals) (on behalf of Tennessee Physicians)
International Courts
- 2021- Manuela and Family v. El Salvador (Inter-American Court of Human Rights) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2017- The Constitutional Court of Chile Brief (Chile) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2010- Promovente: Procurador de los Derechos Humanos y Protecclîn Ciudadana del Estado de Baja California. Acclîn de Inconstitucionalidad (Mexico) (on behalf of AUL)
- 2008- Acción de inconstitucionalidad, expediente 146/2007-00 y su acumulado 147/2000-00, de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación (Mexico) (on behalf of AUL)