STF toughened the admission of amici curiae? Average is the lowest of the decade
Brazil’s Supreme Court Substantially Restricts ‘Friend of the Court’ Filings, Lowest Admission Rate in a Decade
BRASÍLIA – Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF) is tightening restrictions on the acceptance of amicus curiae briefs – submissions from outside parties offering expertise in ongoing cases – with admission rates reaching their lowest point in the last decade. The shift signals a move by the court to prioritize “qualified dialog” and filter out submissions perceived as partisan advocacy disguised as technical analysis,according to recent observations and statements from justices.
The trend comes amidst a rise in concentrated control actions before the STF, making the court’s decision to limit amicus curiae participation notably noteworthy. justices Gilmar Mendes and Luiz Fux have publicly indicated a desire to return the institute to it’s original purpose, rejecting the practice of amicus partis – briefs clearly aligned with one of the litigating parties.
“The essential thing…is that this participation expands the contradiction and democratically legitimizes precedents,avoiding selectivity and imbalance between the groups represented,” argues manoela Virmond Munhoz,as reported in a recent review of the practice. Munhoz advocates for a system that demands openness and representativeness from amici curiae, accepting positions even if aligned with a party, so long as interests are revealed and arguments are substantive.
This stricter approach is supported by academic analysis, including work by Débora Costa Ferreira and Paulo Gustavo Gonet Branco, who have examined the role of amicus curiae in the STF. Their research, alongside that of Adhemar Ferreira Maciel, suggests the court isn’t rejecting social dialogue entirely, but rather seeking to ensure contributions are genuinely technical, pluralistic, and relevant to the constitutional process.
The court’s evolving stance reflects a “maturation of a model that seeks to preserve its credibility,” filtering rhetoric to value meaningful contributions.According to Ferreira’s 2020 analysis, the STF is moving away from simply accepting participation for its own sake, and towards a more discerning evaluation of submitted briefs.
References:
FERREIRA, Débora Costa. Selective friendship: strategic analysis of the role of the amicus curiae in the Federal Supreme Court. Contemporary legal Theory Magazine, Rio de Janeiro, v. 5, no. 2, p. 49-72, 2020.
FERREIRA, Débora Costa; BRANCO, Paulo gustavo Gonet. Amicus curiae in numbers. Neither a friend of the court nor a friend of the party? Brazilian Law Magazine, v. 16, n. 7,p. 169-185, 2017.
MACIEL, Adhemar Ferreira. Amicus curiae: a democratic institute. Legislative Details Magazine, v. 38, n. 153, p. 7-10, 2002.
MUNHOZ, Manoela Virmond. Overcoming the myth of the neutrality of the amicus curiae in Brazilian law: reflections from North American law. Civil Procedure Review, v.15, n. 1, p. 119-142, 2024.