Against a Tidal Wave, Law Firms Fight for Reproductive Rights
Am Law 200 firms have stepped up in the wake of a sudden surge of new legislation limiting access to abortion and related care.
June 26, 2019 at 05:30 AM
4 minute read
If it started as a trickle, it's turned into a flood. New laws limiting abortion rights have been spreading throughout the country, and law firms have responded by channeling their pro bono resources into the fight against them.
Shannon Rose Selden, a partner at Debevoise & Plimpton who leads the firm's asset management litigation practice, says the current moment represents a “sea change” in the volume and nature of the new laws.
“The laws restricting access to abortion are fundamentally not about abortion but are about equality and dignity and respect for women and girls in this country,” Selden says. “I don't want to live in a country where that is not something that is important to us and is not something that we protect.”
In an effort to offer protection, Selden and her Debevoise colleagues have poured thousands of hours of pro bono work into litigation challenging the wave of legislation. Alongside the Center for Reproductive Rights, the firm is battling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to overturn a law whose burdensome regulations have led three-quarters of clinics in Louisiana to close, Selden says. The suit has twice survived the state's motions to dismiss.
Debevoise isn't alone among Big Law firms getting involved in the push for reproductive rights.
Orrick represents Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky in a case in the Sixth Circuit challenging a Kentucky law that would have closed the last clinic in the state. Karen Johnson-McKewan, a San Francisco-based patent partner at the firm, served as lead trial counsel in the Western District of Kentucky, which found the law unconstitutional. Despite the controversial nature of the issue, Orrick, Debevoise and others have proudly stepped in to offer assistance to the nonprofits on the “front lines,” as Johnson-McKewan says.
“I won't say that there's nobody in the firm who disagrees with our taking the case. There were some people who really did not feel good about it, and I have nothing but respect for their views,” Johnson-McKewan says. “But this is a constitutional right, and we're lawyers, and we have an obligation to give back to our communities. I couldn't think of a more appropriate place for us to spend our resources.”
Johnson-McKewan says she's spoken with colleagues at other law firms about how they can best support the organizations at the center of lawsuits opposing new restrictions, and she's also heard from some clients and in-house lawyers who want to offer their hand. But she acknowledges that law firms can't simply step in and save the day.
In the meantime, law firms continue to play their part. Morrison & Foerster helped ensure that a Texas law forcing the cremation of fetal remains was struck down in district court last year, and the firm also secured a $200,000 contempt fine against an anti-abortion activist who attempted to use covert videos to threaten abortion providers. And Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison won a Mississippi district court ruling last November striking down a 15-week abortion ban.
“These laws are being passed with such rapidity around the country. There's a danger of feeling swamped and overwhelmed by them all,” Johnson-McKewan says.
Nonetheless, she says the lawyers and organizations involved in the fight are galvanized, and law firms will continue to help where they can.
In addition to the Louisiana litigation, Selden says Debevoise has a hand in amicus briefings at the U.S. Supreme Court and eight different circuit courts on behalf of a variety of medical organizations. The support is representative of the important role large law firms have in fighting to preserve human rights, she says.
“Even though I have a very busy practice that is revenue-generating, nobody has ever said, 'Look, you should spend less time on that and more on your paying clients,'” Selden says. “It's something that we celebrate, because it's important. It's a fight about justice and women's rights, and that's clearly where our interests lie.”
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 AllQuinn Emanuel Has Thrived in China. Will Trump Help Boost Its Fortunes?
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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