DC Appellate Lawyer to Defend Georgia Abortion Ban
Jeffrey M. Harris joined the litigation boutique Consovoy McCarthy as a partner in 2018 after working for President Donald Trump. Worth mentioning: He also clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts Jr.
July 24, 2019 at 10:01 AM
4 minute read
Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr has retained Jeffrey M. Harris of Consovoy McCarthy from Washington, D.C., to defend the state in a constitutional challenge to an abortion ban set to take effect Jan. 1.
Carr has retained Harris as a special assistant attorney general for the lawsuit, Communications Director Katie Byrd said Tuesday. Other than that, Carr declined to comment, as did Harris.
Harris joined the litigation boutique Consovoy McCarthy as a partner in 2018 after working for President Donald Trump. Harris served as associate administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. He was second in charge of a 50-person staff within the Executive Office of the President reviewing federal regulatory actions and coordinating regulatory policy for the government, according to his bio on the firm website. Previously, Harris was a partner at Kirkland & Ellis, where his practice focused on the U.S. Supreme Court, appellate and complex litigation.
Harris clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. as well as D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judges David Sentelle and Laurence Silberman, according to his firm bio. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and Harvard law school.
SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective, the Feminist Women's Health Center, Planned Parenthood and other clinics and physicians have sued Carr along with Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and prosecutors around the state in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The complaint alleges the abortion ban created by House Bill 481 is unconstitutional and violates U.S. Supreme Court precedent. The case has been assigned to Judge Steve Jones.
On Tuesday, the groups filed a brief in support of a motion for preliminary injunctive relief. “Our first priority is to block this law from going into effect during the pendency of this litigation,” plaintiffs' counsel ACLU Georgia Legal Director Sean J. Young said.
The document filed Tuesday said the “balance of harm tips decidedly” in favor of SisterSong and the other advocacy groups challenging the ban.
“While plaintiffs and their patients and members will suffer numerous irreparable harms without an injunction, defendants will suffer no injury whatsoever; plaintiffs' requested relief will simply preserve the status quo of nearly five decades,” the motion said.
The abortion ban in Georgia is similar to those that have passed in a dozen states. None has taken effect, and all have been blocked by federal judges. Appeals are pending. The Georgia case would go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which has already rejected requests to uphold later bans in two other cases—while expressing disapproval of the procedures at issue and Supreme Court precedent. Proponents of the bans have made clear their ambition to prompt the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark holding in Roe v. Wade.
Emphasizing the importance of the case, ACLU Georgia Executive Director Andrea Young quoted Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in Planned Parenthood v. Casey affirming Roe v. Wade: “The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.”
The case is SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective v. Brian Kemp, Civil Action No.: 1:19-cv-02973-SCJ.
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
© 2025 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 AllOn the Move: Freeman Mathis & Gary Promotes 16 to Partner, Expands to Denver
5 minute readGeorgia Supreme Court Honoring Troutman Pepper Partner, Former Chief Justice
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1You Too Can Be a Programmer: Connecting to Legal Platform APIs With Generative AI (Part 2)
- 2Court of Appeals and Appellate Division As Courts of First Instance
- 3Federal Judge Slaps Down the SEC’s Attempt to Regulate Crypto Liquidity Providers
- 4A Client Is Guilty; But Another Man Is Wrongfully Convicted
- 5Legal Tech's Predictions for Cybersecurity in 2025
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