California's Solicitor General Would Make SCOTUS Debut in DACA Case
Michael Mongan, who clerked for Justice David Souter and for D.C. Circuit Judge Merrick Garland, would share time with Gibson Dunn's Theodore Olson in challenging the Trump administration's move to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
September 30, 2019 at 05:31 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
California's top state appellate lawyer is poised to make his U.S. Supreme Court debut in just a few weeks in support of shielding hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants from deportation under the Obama-era program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.
Solicitor General Michael Mongan is requesting to split 40 minutes with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's Theodore Olson, who would argue for certain individual DACA recipients. Mongan would represent the interests of 20 states—including California, New York, Connecticut, Delaware and Pennsylvania—that are arguing against the Trump administration's efforts to rescind the program.
Mongan would make his rookie appearance before the high court in one of the new term's most visible cases, one that crystalizes the ongoing fight between the White House and Democrats over immigration and citizenship. But he is no stranger to the nation's biggest legal stages.
Named California's solicitor general just a little over two months ago, Mongan argued for the state in defense of DACA before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in May 2018. Six months later, the Ninth Circuit upheld a lower court's injunction blocking the Trump administration's attempted rollback of DACA, which temporarily exempts certain undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children from deportation.
The Supreme Court is expected soon to outline its argument plans for the DACA case. It's not uncommon in consolidated cases to let a variety of lawyers argue in support of various positions.
Kyle Hawkins, the Texas state solicitor, has asked the Supreme Court for 10 minutes of argument time to advance the interests of Republican-led states who are supporting the Trump administration's move to end DACA. Noel Francisco, the Justice Department's solicitor general, is expected to argue for the U.S. government.
Mongan, while serving as a deputy solicitor general, was lead counsel for the state and some of its largest cities on an amicus curiae brief challenging the federal government's ultimately unsuccessful attempt to place a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. Census.
A 2006 graduate of Stanford Law School, Mongan clerked for Judge Merrick Garland of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and, later, U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter. He served as deputy counsel to Vice President Joe Biden before joining Munger, Tolles & Olson in 2010.
Mongan went to work for California Solicitor General Edward DuMont in 2014 and served as a deputy and supervising deputy until taking the reins of the 10-attorney office this summer after DuMont resigned. DuMont, a former Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr partner, has not said what his plans are.
In the DACA case, Mongan is attorney of record for California, which filed its merits brief on Sept. 27 in the Supreme Court. The team working with Mongan includes Michael Newman, senior assistant attorney general, and deputy solicitors general Samuel Siegel and Joshua Patashnik. The solicitors general for Maine, Maryland and Minnesota were on the states' brief with the California team.
The Gibson Dunn team includes Theodore Boutrous Jr., global co-chair of the firm's litigation group, and Stuart Delery, a Washington-based partner who formerly was a leading Obama-era Justice Department lawyer.
"Executive power is important, and we respect it," Olson, a former George W. Bush administration U.S. solicitor general, told The New York Times last week. "But it has to be done the right way. It has to be done in an orderly fashion so that citizens can understand what is being done and people whose lives have depended on a governmental policy aren't swept away arbitrarily and capriciously. And that's what's happened here."
When Rookies Take Bat at the US Supreme Court
|Mike Scarcella contributed reporting from Washington.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBaltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
3 minute readFederal Judge Sends Novel Damages Question in Employment Dispute to State Court
5 minute readCounty Reps: Appeal Likely Following State Court's Sales Tax Ruling for Retail Marijuana
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
- 2Congress and Courts Are Considering Litigation Financing: Is Disclosure Imminent?
- 3Bar Report — Nov. 25, 2024
- 4People in the News—Nov. 25, 2024—Eckert Seamans, Klehr Harrison
- 5How We Made Practice Group Chair: 'One of the Most Important Skills Is Being a Good Listener,' Say Timothy Kincaid and Brad Vaiana of Winston & Strawn
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250