Noel Francisco, Trump's Solicitor General Pick, Is Sidelined for Now
The Trump administration didn't sideline former Jones Day partner Noel Francisco for any performance reasons. Rather, federal law bars Francisco from serving as the acting head of the office to which he has been nominated to lead on a permanent basis. The "acting" SG title has passed indefinitely to the lawyer Francisco chose as his principal deputy—former Sullivan & Cromwell special counsel Jeffrey Wall.
April 06, 2017 at 11:12 AM
17 minute read
Noel Francisco experienced the prestige and responsibility—for about a month this year—of serving as the government's top lawyer in the U.S. Supreme Court. The former Jones Day partner now is ensconced in a U.S. Justice Department front office, serving as a senior adviser to the associate attorney general.
The Trump administration didn't sideline Francisco for any performance reasons. Rather, federal law bars Francisco from serving as the acting head of the office to which he has been nominated to lead on a permanent basis.
President Donald Trump named Francisco as principal deputy solicitor general on Jan. 23. The veteran high court litigator soon assumed the position of acting U.S. solicitor general while the administration considered lawyers for the post. Trump ended the uncertainty on March 7 when he announced his intent to nominate Francisco to be the solicitor general.
The “acting” SG title has passed indefinitely to the lawyer Francisco chose as his principal deputy—former Sullivan & Cromwell special counsel Jeffrey Wall.
The change in Francisco's jobs, even if temporary, may be somewhat frustrating to a veteran appellate lawyer who now must watch from the sidelines as litigation piles up in the federal appellate courts over Trump's immigration and environmental executive orders.
Wall will continue to form and present the government's legal position in the appellate courts and the Supreme Court. And Wall could be called on to argue two travel ban cases in May in federal appeals courts in Seattle and Richmond.
Francisco and Wall did not immediately return messages Thursday seeking comment.
The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, which some experts say only a handful of people really understand, does not allow Francisco to serve simultaneously as acting solicitor general and nominee.
The federal vacancies law had 15 minutes of fame this term in the Supreme Court. The justices in National Labor Relations Board v. SW General were asked: Can a senior agency official appointed to serve as acting head of the same agency continue to serve in this capacity after being nominated by the president to permanently fill the office, even if the officer never served as first assistant to the office? The answer, in a 6-2 decision in March, was no.
The Supreme Court's decision had nothing to do with Francisco's stepping aside, according scholars familiar with the Federal Vacancies Reform Act.
Congress passed the vacancy law in 1998 in response to a battle in the Senate over President Bill Clinton's nomination of Bill Lann Lee to lead the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. After the Senate Judiciary Committee thwarted Lee's nomination, Clinton brought Lee into the Civil Rights Division as deputy. He then relied on the old version of the act to say that when the top position was vacant, the deputy became acting assistant attorney general.
The Senate Judiciary Committee hasn't yet scheduled Francisco's confirmation hearing. For now, he's working in the same office as Jesse Panuccio, a former Foley & Lardner partner and general counsel to Florida Gov. Rick Scott who's serving as the acting associate attorney general.
The office of associate attorney general oversees such DOJ divisions as antitrust, civil rights, tax and environment and natural resources. The Senate is expected soon to vote on the nomination of Rachel Brand for that post, the third-in-command at Main Justice.
President Barack Obama's first solicitor general, Elena Kagan, was confirmed in March 2009. She argued her first case that Septemeber in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
Correction: An earlier version of this report misidentified the date of Elena Kagan's first argument as solicitor general. It was Sept. 9, 2009.
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 AllLegal Issues to Watch in the US Appeals Courts in 2025
Second Circuit Upholds $5M Judgment Against Trump in E. Jean Carroll Case
4 minute readDivided 5th Circuit Shoots Down Nasdaq Diversity Rules
Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1TikTok Law and TikTok Politics
- 2California Supreme Court Vacates Murder Conviction in Infant Abuse Case
- 3New York’s Proposed Legislation Restraining Transfer of Real Property
- 4Withers Hires Lawyers, Staff From LA Trusts and Estates Boutique
- 5To Speed Criminal Discovery, NY Bill Proposes Police-to-Prosecutor Pipeline For Records
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