Page 36 - FDCC_February2026_Flyer

FDCC PILLARS
FDCC Amicus and Public Policy
Committee Update
by Wystan Ackerman
The FDCC Amicus
and Public Policy
Committee has been
actively advancing
the Federation’s
voice in key legal
Wystan Ackerman
and policy arenas.
Wystan Ackerman
succeeded Bill Vita as chair, and
several new members have joined
the committee, including John Paul
O’Herron, Crystal Uebelher, and
Nicole Benjamin (as a vice chair). In
addition to Nicole, Larry Ebner, Kay
Hodge and Lori Sebransky serve as
vice chairs of the committee.
The committee has evaluated
several amicus brief opportunities,
reinforcing FDCC’s commitment to
shaping jurisprudence in important
cases impacting the defense bar:
Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc.
v. County Commissioners of
Boulder County (U.S. Supreme
Court, No. 25-170)
The question presented in this
case is: “Whether federal law
precludes state-law claims seeking
relief for injuries allegedly caused
by the effects of interstate and
international greenhouse-gas
emissions on the global climate.”
FDCC joined a coalition brief led
by the Atlantic Legal Foundation
and Washington Legal Foundation,
urging the Court to grant certiorari
and hold that federal law precludes
climate-change tort suits. The
brief highlighted the staggering
consequences of allowing climate-
change tort suits to proliferate and
that such suits implicate federal
interests that transcend state tort
law, and that require a uniform
federal rule of decision. The Court
requested a response to the petition
and has not yet decided whether to
grant certiorari.
Atlas Turner, Inc. v. Welch (U.S.
Supreme Court, No. 25-213)
The question presented in th is
case, which seeks U.S. Supreme
Court review of a decision by the
South Carolina Supreme Court,
is “whether the Due Process
Clause permits a court with
specific personal jurisdiction over
a defendant to exercise in rem
jurisdiction over the defendant’s
out-of-territory property.” FDCC
joined with the American Tort
Reform Association to file an
amicus brief highlighting the
background behind this case:
troublesome receivership practices
in a South Carolina trial court
that has expansively asserted
its authority far beyond South
Carolina, in a manner that has
been sharply criticized by courts in
other jurisdictions in the U.S. and
internationally, with little oversight
by the South Carolina appellate
courts.
Policy Advocacy: Potential
Rule Changes
The committee also looks for
opportunities to participate in
public policy advocacy, such as
rulemaking processes. Last year,
the FDCC and other organizations
successfully opposed a proposed
amendment to Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 29, which
would have required a motion for
leave to be filed for every federal
amicus brief, eliminating the ability
to file amicus briefs with consent of
the parties. This year, the committee
considered whether to join a
letter advocating against adoption
of a proposed amendment to
32 February 2026 | Federation Flyer www.thefederation.org