Summary

STATEMENT OF INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE

Established in 2001, the College of Commercial Arbitrators ("CCA") is the leading organization of commercial arbitrators in the United States. The CCA promotes the highest standards of arbitrator ethics and practice. It provides meaningful contributions to the profession, the public, and the businesses, individuals and counsel who depend on commercial arbitration as an effective means of dispute resolution.

The CCA has a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of these cases. The Executive Orders at issue in this appeal threaten the rule of law, which is the cornerstone of commercial arbitration. Commercial arbitration does not exist in a vacuum; it is part of an ecosystem of arbitrators, businesses, individuals, lawyers, law firms, and judges, all of whom rely on adherence to the rule of law. In April 2025, the CCA published a Statement on the Rule of Law, which reaffirmed certain of its basic principles and values. Those included the principle that "[s]eeking to destroy law firms by threatening their clients with loss of government contracts undermines the Rule of Law and must be stopped." The legal community's overwhelmingly positive reception of its Statement demonstrates the importance of the CCA's affirmative stand regarding the impact of the Executive Orders on the rule of law and commercial arbitration.

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

The rule of law is central to the arbitration process; fair arbitration cannot exist without it. Parties rely on the existence of the rule of law when choosing to enter into arbitration agreements as the dispute resolution mechanism for their commercial dealings. Arbitral awards are reviewed and enforced by the judiciary. The integrity of the arbitration process is threatened if judges are afraid to confirm or enforce awards that may be unpopular with government officials. Arbitral proceedings also risk becoming compromised in a world in which law firms and lawyers face the prospect of retaliation for representing clients that are unpopular with the government, since the arbitral process depends on lawyers who zealously advocate for their clients. Furthermore, the arbitral process requires that arbitrators--many of whom practice law at firms--remain free from coercion and without fear that a ruling could bring government retribution against them or their firms.

Today, the rule of law in the United States is threatened by systematic attacks on the independence of the judiciary, law firms, and individual attorneys. Arbitrators are not immune from this assault. To the contrary, historical precedent discussed in this amicus brief demonstrates that, while direct subversion of the judiciary and law firms is often the starting point of anti-democratic attacks on the rule of law, assaults on arbitration often promptly follow.3 Such attacks are not random; rather, commercial arbitration's role as an independent means of resolving disputes threatens the goal of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes of bending legal systems to their will, eliminating independence, and removing a major impediment to the concentration of power in the government. Attacks on arbitration and arbitrators are characteristic of oppressive regimes in which the rule of law is degraded. The CCA submits this brief to explain why Executive Orders 14,230, 14,246, 14,250, and 14,263 (collectively, the "Executive Orders") imperil arbitration--a critical part of the justice system--in the United States. The CCA urges this Court to affirm the judgments below, rejecting the Executive Orders as unconstitutional.

Footnotes omitted