This case involves the role of amici curiae and their impact on justice. The D.C. Circuit refused to consider additional arguments presented by amici in support of petitioners, thus eliminating any role for amici solely because those arguments had not been made or adopted by the parties — in violation Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 29. The decision is in the minority of a 6–4 circuit split regarding the role of amici. In this brief, the Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund joined Cato to argue that resolving the circuit split regarding the role of amici is important to the proper administration of the judicial system and to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.