Evidence from credible sources supports the statement as accurate. Learn more in Methodology.
The Department of Labor's amicus brief appears on the court docket or in public records showing the Department made the described argument to the Court.
Evidence from official and reputable legal sources supports the statement.
The U.S. Department of Labor’s own January 9, 2026 news release on Pizarro v. Home Depot states that “The department advised the court in an amicus brief that the case warranted review, but only to reaffirm settled legal principles and reject the plaintiffs’ position.” The Supreme Court docket for Pizarro v. The Home Depot, Inc. (No. 24-620) confirms that a “Brief amicus curiae of United States” was filed on December 9, 2025 following a call for the views of the Solicitor General, showing that the federal government (with the Department of Labor’s involvement) did submit an amicus brief. Secondary legal commentary referencing the Pizarro amicus filing describes the brief as arguing that ERISA does not impose a special burden-shifting framework and that plaintiffs bear the burden of proving loss causation, which is aligned with rejecting the plaintiffs’ legal position and supporting reaffirmation of existing Supreme Court precedent. Given that the claim closely tracks the Department of Labor’s own formal description of its amicus position and is corroborated by the Supreme Court docket and legal analyses, the statement is accurate.
Verdict: True, because official Department of Labor communication and the Supreme Court docket confirm that an amicus brief was filed on behalf of the United States and that its stated purpose was to urge review only to reaffirm settled law and reject the plaintiffs’ theory.