Hogan's Neal Katyal Wants to Train Next Generation of Supreme Court Advocates
Former high court clerks at Hogan Lovells bring the credentials, and Katyal supplies the opportunity to make an early mark.
July 17, 2019 at 05:23 PM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
For former acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal, elevating the next crop of Supreme Court advocates at Hogan Lovells starts with getting them deeply involved in high court matters early in their firm careers.
Hogan Lovells scored two U.S. Supreme Court victories in cases argued by Katyal in the court's last term: McDonough v. Smith, a case about when government officials can be sued for fabricating criminal evidence, and Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. American Humanist Association, the so-called “peace cross” case regarding a World War I memorial in the shape of a Christian cross on public land in Maryland.
As co-leader of his firm's appellate practice, Katyal is quick to praise his younger Hogan Lovells colleagues in those cases, including newly promoted partner Colleen Roh Sinzdak and senior associates Mitchell Reich, Thomas Schmidt and Katie Wellington.
Katyal called the four “crazy credentialed” and diverse, citing their varied politics, gender, orientations, “and just the experience that they've had.”
Still, all four attorneys attended Harvard Law School or Yale Law School and all were Supreme Court clerks. Reich clerked for Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, Schmidt clerked for Justice Stephen Breyer, and Sinzdak and Wellington both clerked for Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. Wellington also clerked for then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
“It's like having Supreme Court justices on call,” Sinzdak said of the group's expertise. “You can always call Tom, call Mitch, call Katie, and say, like, 'I have this knotty question, can you help me?' and you're dealing with these brilliant people.”
Katyal said he looked for Supreme Court clerks with high emotional intelligence. The firm, he said, sought to empower a younger lawyer in each of the cases it has moving to the Supreme Court, including next term, when Reich is set to deliver his first-ever Supreme Court argument in Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance.
“I didn't have this [view] before I was in the solicitor general's office,” Katyal said. “I generally had this view that a group of people will yield a better product … but I actually have come to the view that you give a young associate like these folks who have all of the challenge and brain power and diligence and you say, “You're running this thing,” and by concentrating responsibility it really yields not just a better product but it also is the best way to train someone.”
Katyal “really wants to help folks get their foot in the door,” Reich said in an interview. “Neal has been incredible about putting junior folks forward to do these arguments. He helped me argue part of the [Trump administration] travel ban in the Ninth Circuit.”
Knowledge of the Supreme Court's inner-workings is critical to informing Hogan Lovells' approach to individual cases. Not content to aim for a 5-4 majority along ideological lines at the high court, Reich said the team deliberately targeted the court's liberal bloc in the Maryland peace cross case to ensure a large majority in support of their argument.
“Neal clerked for Justice Breyer, I clerked for Justice Kagan, and so we know their jurisprudence really well, and we thought that this was a case where we could actually get two of the more liberal-leaning justices to side with a majority of the court in upholding a cross like this,” Reich said. “From the beginning that was our strategy: These are justices who care a lot about not disturbing long-standing traditions and monuments that have been around for a long time.”
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 AllWhy the Founders of IP Boutique Fisch Sigler Are Stepping Away From the Law and Starting an AI Venture
‘How to Succeed as a Trial Lawyer’: Talking Shop With Author and Veteran Litigator Stewart Edelstein
Litigation Leaders: Labaton’s Eric Belfi on Running Case Investigation, Analysis and Evaluation In-House
Trending Stories
- 1'Fulfilled Her Purpose on the Court': Presiding Judge M. Yvette Miller Is 'Ready for a New Challenge'
- 2Litigation Leaders: Greenspoon Marder’s Beth-Ann Krimsky on What Makes Her Team ‘Prepared, Compassionate and Wicked Smart’
- 3A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
- 4Grabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
- 5Navigating Twitter's 'Rocky Deal Process' Helped Drive Simpson Thacher's Tech and Telecom Practice
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