NACBA, along with the Connnecticut Bar Association, its co-plaintiff in a Connecticut lawsuit challenging the debt relief agency provisions, has filed an amicus brief in Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz v. United States, the Supreme Court case that will consider whether attorneys are debt relief agencies and, if so, whether the "gag rule" of section 526(a)(4) and the advertising provisions of section 528 are unconstitutional.  NACBA's brief focuses on the extensive factual record developed in the Connecticut case, which itself is scheduled for argument in the Second Circuit on September 24.  The brief explains how that evidentiary record, uncontroverted by the government, demonstrates the harmful real-life effects of the provisions, and thus it will make an important contribution to the court's understanding of the serious problems faced by attorneys who attempt to comply with them. Also joining on NACBA's brief were AARP and the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School.