In what way do amicus curiae or friends of the court briefs shape the decisions of constitutional courts outside of the United States? Using a unique dataset of over 900 amicus curiae briefs from the Bulgarian Constitutional Court hearing cases of constitutional review and legal interpretation, we find that the Court is more inclined to incorporate the reasoning of briefs from powerful government actors rather than non-governmental groups. These results call into question whether the amicus curiae process in Bulgaria lives up to democratic expectations for including less powerful civil society and special interest viewpoints into decision-making. The study is one of the first of its kinds to explore how the reasoning found within amicus curiae influences an important apex court outside of the United States.