Former US House General Counsel Remembers Tip O'Neill and Raising Level of the Job
Stanley Brand discusses his role in modernizing the office of general counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives.
March 01, 2019 at 06:19 PM
6 minute read
Stanley Brand once played a pivotal role in modernizing the office of general counsel for the U.S. House of Representatives.
When Brand took the general counsel post in 1976 at age 28, he reported to the House clerk, and the work primarily involved reviewing contracts. But with the support of House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O'Neill, Brand soon took the job to new levels, advising House leadership on legal issues and, when necessary, becoming a litigator.
Corporate Counsel recently interviewed Brand on the role he played in the evolution of the House general counsel from contract reviewer to activist lawyer. The job helped pave the way for him to open his own boutique firm in 1984, representing defendants in some of Washington's high-profile cases, including former White House aide George Stephanopoulos, former Rep. Tony Coelho, former House Majority Whip William Gray and former Rep. Dan Rostenkowski. Since 2015, he is senior counsel at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld in Washington, D.C.
Here are excerpts from the interview, edited for brevity and clarity.
Corporate Counsel: How did you come to land the general counsel job at such a young age?
Stanley Brand: I came to Washington in 1971 and got a job with then-Majority Whip Tip O'Neill in his congressional office. I dealt with district and legislative issues, and did some speech writing. I went to law school at night, and after I graduated I went to work for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for two years as a line attorney.
I was planning to join a company [as an in-house lawyer] or a K Street law firm that does securities work when I received a call from Tip O'Neill's administrative assistant, who said Tip was going to be Speaker, “and he'd like you to come back and work with us. He'd like you to check into the general counsel's job in the clerk's office.”
I ran into the Speaker at a party a little later and he asked if I checked the job out. I said I did, but it sounded like pretty mundane stuff. And he looked at me in that style of his, and said, “Well, that's what he does. You might do more.” I was intrigued, so I took the job.
CC: So how did it change?
SB: Lo and behold, I discovered that the clerk was at the vortex of all these legal issues in Congress that no one was paying attention to or interested in taking on. So I began doing that. There were a lot of lawyers in the House, but most worked with committees writing legislation. No one was attending to institutional legal problems of the House.
CC: Can you give us some examples of the kind of issues you tackled?
SB: Well, for instance, members of Congress would get subpoenas to produce records. Were those records protected by privilege? Or one committee issued a subpoena to the Department of Commerce, and I had to oppose the White House raising executive privilege to try and block it. In another case, I initiated a lawsuit through the Department of Justice to contest the state of Maryland levying income tax against members of Congress whose homes weren't there, but who resided in Maryland for purposes of attending sessions. There were just a host of issues that needed lawyering.
It became in a sense the attorney general of the House of Representatives, because of the role that I took and developed in litigation. I represented the House and its members in the U.S. Supreme Court several times, and in various federal districts and courts of appeal. It became a litigation office.
When my deputy, Steven Ross [now a partner at Akin Gump] took over when I left, they recognized that the role had expanded significantly, and they formalized the change. They moved it out of the clerk's office and created a separate office of general counsel under the joint leadership group—the speaker of the House, the majority and minority leaders and the majority and minority whips.
CC: Looking back, what do you think were the most significant cases you handled?
SB: The most significant criminal case might have involved Henry Helstoski, a member of Congress from New Jersey who was indicted for allegedly taking bribes for introducing private immigration bills. Back then you could become a citizen, in effect, by getting someone to introduce a private bill.
The question was whether using his introduction of the bills as evidence contravened the U.S. Constitution's speech and debate clause, which said senators and representatives shall not be questioned in any other forum about their speech and debates. The Supreme Court upheld the speech and debate clause, saying [prosecutors] couldn't use those legislative acts against him. We went in with his lawyer and moved to dismiss the case. He walked away a free man, but lost his election in the interim.
CC: Were there any others?
SB: One of the most momentous civil cases for the House was one involving what was called the legislative veto. Congress had increasingly relied on the legislative veto provision in certain statutes to check the bureaucracy and to [stop] presidential actions the majority didn't like. I was arguing for it, but the Supreme Court held [in 1983] that the legislative vetoes were unconstitutional.
In another significant case I defended the House chaplain against a suit by atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair, who you might recall had won a Supreme Court case banning prayer in public schools. She thought the mere existence of the office of chaplain was a violation of the Constitution's Establishment Clause.
I lost in front of a panel of [The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia] that included Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the time. But I petitioned and got an en banc rehearing. Meanwhile the Supreme Court considered a parallel case in which it approved a chaplain in the state of Nebraska. The court said the framers of the Constitution themselves had a chaplain who [gave an invocation] just prior to adopting the First Amendment. That mooted our case.
CC: Overall, were you glad you took the job?
SB: It was the best job I ever had. And the most fun I ever had. It was a tremendous opportunity for me. And what made it all the more special was working for Tip O'Neill. I remember I sometimes asked him what he wanted me to do, and he'd say, “You're the lawyer; you tell me.” His personality and demeanor and his treatment of people were so wonderful across all spectrums. He was a unique figure in history.
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 AllAs AI Transforms Drug Development, FDA Is Scrambling to Figure Out Guardrails
5 minute readElection Outcome Could Spur Policy U-Turns Across Employment Landscape
6 minute readPolicy Wonks' Obsession: What Will Tuesday's Election Mean for FTC Firebrand Khan?
6 minute readInside Track: Lawyers for Big Tech Give Harris Benefit of Doubt, Despite Pummeling They Took Under Biden
Trending Stories
- 1Will the 9th Circuit Still be Center Stage in Trump Policy Challenges?
- 2Obtaining Reimbursement from Medicaid
- 3NY Requiring Lawyers to Report Out-of-State Admissions, Public Discipline
- 4Man Hits Cow in Case That Tests 'Unrealistic Delivery Times'
- 5DC Judge, Applying 'Loper Bright,' Dismisses Complaint in Medicare Drug-Classification Dispute
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