The Business Community’s Voice Meets the Judicial Process

 

Decisions from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (S.J.C) have a meaningful, long-standing impact on business. The Chamber created the Amicus Advisory Board to ensure that public policy efforts are elevated to the S.J.C. and the judicial branch hears the voice of Chamber members.

Members of the Advisory Board review and determine whether to file amicus curiae briefs, which emphasize the significant and far-reaching impact of the S.J.C.’s decisions on the state’s economy, the business community, the conduct of commerce, and the Chamber’s policy priorities. 

Amicus Advisory Board Members

 

  • Edmund C. Kenealy, Liberty Mutual Insurance, Advisory Board Co-Chair 
  • Ian Roffman, Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP, Advisory Board Co-Chair 
  • Felicia H. Ellsworth, Partner, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 
  • Jason Frank, Partner, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 
  • Angela Gomes, Partner, Sullivan & Worcester LLP
  • Kurt Hemr, Partner, Litigation, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP
  • Jodi Luster, Vice President and Senior Counsel, State Street
  • R. Daniel O’Connor, Partner, Ropes & Gray LLP
  • Allison O’Neil, Partner, Locke Lord LLP
  • Paige Scott Reed, Partner, Prince Lobel Tye LLP
  • George Skelly, Partner, Nixon Peabody LLP
  • Madeleine Timin, Senior Vice President, Regional General Counsel, Boston Properties
  • Megan F.S. Tipper, Assistant General Counsel, National Grid 

 

 

Policy - Amicus Advisory Board
Policy - Amicus Advisory Board

Chamber Leads in Question of Surtax Ballot, Filing Brief Supporting Plaintiffs in Anderson v. Healey

The Chamber filed an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs in Anderson, et al. v. Healey (No. SJC-13257), a case dealing with how the proposed constitutional amendment to add a new state tax rate will be presented to voters. The Chamber’s brief argues that the ballot question summary and the related “Yes” statement must clearly inform voters that new revenues generated by the tax are not required to fund education and transportation. Given the magnitude of the proposed constitutional amendments, and the prolonged process needed to correct it, the Chamber argues that all voters must understand that the Legislature retains full discretion over how additional funds would be spent.

Read the Amicus Brief
Courthouse image
Courthouse image

The Courts Recognize Critical Business Priorities

With the guidance of the Chamber’s Amicus Advisory Board brief, the S.J.C. affirmed the lower court’s decision in Rosenberg v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. The Chamber’s brief argued that the trial court’s decision was a fair, clear, and consistent interpretation of the Massachusetts False Claims Act. One aspect of the Commonwealth’s competitiveness is maintaining consistency with federal law and other states on issues that can negatively impact businesses. If Massachusetts adopts a policy that is an outlier and exposes businesses in the Commonwealth to higher litigation risks and costs than other states, it risks losing out on future growth. Affirming the lower court’s decision keeps Massachusetts competitive and an attractive place to do business.

Read the Amicus Brief

Amicus Curiae Brief Request

The Amicus Advisory Board and Chamber staff will review and consider amicus curiae brief requests on a rolling basis.
Complete and submit the amicus curiae brief request form to policy@bostonchamber.com and a member of the Chamber team will be in contact with more information.Submit an Amicus Brief Request

a(Required)