Friend of the Court briefs, and any other filings, must meet certain criteria, including how the pleading pertains to the matter currently being litigated. You often hear on TV shows that testimony is being admitted "subject to connection." Same thing applies here.

Consider how hard it is to get a criminal defendant's record of past misdeeds before a trial court. The Beltway Sniper cases are recent examples of this basic legal tenant in action. Well, it is more difficult to get a corporation's previous business record into a "law and equity" case as there often has been no court finding of whether said previous corporate conduct was illegal. I recall that in fighting some of the last Illinois Central abandonments, it was difficult to get their slash-and-burn abandonment policy before the ICC since the Commission had approved these abandonment petitions and they were not "legally or regulatorially noxious."

Unsavory behavior to us railroad preservationists seldom rises to the level of being illegal. Now, if the rail preservationist community wishes to get involved in something, consider lobbying state legislatures to create a property class protecting irreplaceable railroad treasures (like the Burlington steam locomotive that was cut up for scrap after a protracted legal process). That will start a real howl from those concerned with the "takings" and defacto regulatory siezures" that now often arise from environmental protection laws.

Might I refer all to John Craft's posts on this thread as they are thoughtful and enlightening.