Katyal Begins Defense of New Pa. Congressional Map in Redistricting Fight Before SCOTUS
Neal Katyal has joined Gov. Tom Wolf's efforts to defend Pennsylvania's recently re-drawn congressional districts before the U.S. Supreme Court.
March 05, 2018 at 05:46 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Legal Intelligencer
Neal Katyal. Photo: Diego M. Radzinschi/ALM
A Big Law attorney known for battling President Donald Trump's proposed travel bans has joined Gov. Tom Wolf's efforts to defend Pennsylvania's recently re-drawn congressional districts before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Hogan Lovells partner Neal Katyal joined Wolf's legal team last week, and on Monday he filed a response to calls from several Pennsylvania Republican lawmakers to have the U.S. Supreme Court upend a congressional map that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court drew up last month after determining that the previous map was unconstitutionally gerrymandered.
Katyal was acting solicitor general in the administration of former President Barack Obama, and has recently been in the spotlight representing Hawaii in that state's efforts to block the Trump administration from suspending the entry of foreign nationals from several predominantly Muslim countries.
Katyal has agreed to represent the Wolf administration in the redistricting fight pro bono.
Wolf's brief to the U.S. Supreme Court was one of eight filed Monday in Turzai v. League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania. The filings come in response to a request by Republican legislators to have the U.S. Supreme Court stay the newly drawn congressional map while their efforts to have the map vacated work their way through the appellate courts.
In January, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled 5-2 that the state's congressional map drawn up in 2011 had been such a partisan gerrymander that it “clearly, plainly and palpably violate[d] the constitution.” Several weeks later, on a 4-3 vote, the court issued a new map to be used in the upcoming congressional race.
State legislators, led by Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives Michael Turzai and Senate President Pro Tempore Joseph Scarnati, quickly challenged the new map in federal court, and sought to block its use in the upcoming 2018 election cycle.
After the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania declined to grant the emergency stay, Turzai and Scarnati filed an application for stay with Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who gave the parties until Monday to respond.
“The Pennsylvania Supreme Court conspicuously seized the redistricting process and prevented any meaningful ability for the legislature to enact a remedial map to ensure a court-drawn map,” the emergency application for stay said.
Jason Torchinsky of Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky and Kathleen Gallagher of Cipriani & Werner filed the application Tuesday on behalf of Turzai and Scarnati.
In its response, filed Monday, the League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania, which filed the successful state court challenge to the 2011 map, noted that the Republican legislators had previously asked Alito to stay the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's January decision to toss the 2011 map, and said, “Now it's deja vu all over again.”
“Applicants return to this court, again seeking a stay, raising arguments materially identical to the ones they presented barely a month ago. But their arguments have not improved with age,” said the response, filed by Mimi McKenzie of the Public Interest Law Center and Arnold & Porter's David Gersch. “Their ostensible hook for federal intervention remains an elections clause theory that this court has squarely rejected in decisions dating back nearly a century.”
Wolf, in his response, made similar arguments that the case raised state court issues and that Alito had already rejected similar efforts from Scarnati and Turzai.
“If anything, the current stay request is on weaker ground than the last because the commonwealth has now begun to implement the new map, tilting the equities even further against federal judicial intrusion,” Wolf said in the motion.
In an email, Katyal said, “I'm honored to have joined the team, and very much look forward to the federal courts' evaluation of the thorough and careful opinion of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Because the matter is now pending in multiple courts, I won't have further comment at this time.”
Torchinsky and Gallagher did not return a call for comment Monday afternoon.
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 AllCase Over Fatal Phila. Food Truck Explosion Resolved in $160M Pretrial Accord
Seeger Weiss Awarded $51M in Fees for 'Landmark' NFL Concussion Settlement
Lancaster Jury Awards $4M Over Misdiagnosis of Infant's Fatal Whooping Cough
4 minute readTrending 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