Final answer:
The assertion that amicus briefs rarely impact judicial decisions is false. Amicus curiae filings can significantly influence Supreme Court rulings by providing the justices with additional insights and legal arguments, often reflecting the broader implications of potential decisions on various sectors of society.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that amicus briefs rarely have an impact on judicial decision-making is false. Such briefs can indeed be influential in court decisions, especially in cases before the Supreme Court. An amicus curiae, which means "friend of the court," is filed by individuals or groups that are not parties to the case but have a strong interest in the outcome. Through amicus briefs, interest groups provide the justices with additional perspectives, potential implications of their rulings, and legal arguments that can be essential for the Court's deliberation processes.
For instance, in landmark cases such as Obergefell v. Hodges, numerous amicus briefs were submitted, including one by the Human Rights Campaign, which argued that denying same-sex couples the right to marry was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court's decision in favor of same-sex marriage shows that amicus briefs can play a vital role in swaying the Court's rulings. Amicus briefs are a primary method through which interest groups participate in Supreme Court cases, reflecting their importance in the American judicial system.