Who's Who: The Lawyers Defending Trump's Travel Ban
Longtime government attorneys and Big Law litigators are among the familiar names leading the travel ban appeal.
June 02, 2017 at 03:09 PM
5 minute read
If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the case against President Donald Trump's revised travel ban executive order, they'll see a mix of familiar faces from Big Law and government representing the president.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit last week upheld an injunction against the order, which bars immigration from six majority-Muslim countries. The court agreed to hear the case en banc in a move that fast-tracked the litigation for the Supreme Court.
The government asked the Supreme Court to step in Thursday.
Taking up the case will lead to a showdown between lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and National Immigration Law Center and the federal government. So who's on the government's team? Their names might ring a few bells:
Jeffrey Wall: As acting solicitor general, Jeffrey Wall has been at the forefront of the second round of travel ban litigation. After the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against Trump's first travel ban executive order, issued in January, Trump issued a revised order in March.
Wall has defended that new order at the district courts in Maryland and Hawaii and then the appeals courts in the Fourth and Ninth circuit. In fact, Fourth Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson had to recuse himself because Wall is married to his daughter.
Wall returned to the DOJ in March after a brief stint as the co-head of the appellate litigation practice at Sullivan & Cromwell. He was an assistant to the solicitor general from 2008 to 2013, and worked at Kirkland & Ellis as an associate prior to that. He got his start as a law clerk for Justice Clarence Thomas. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and the University of Chicago School of Law.
August Flentje: Before Jeffrey Wall, there was August Flentje, at least when it came to travel ban litigation.
Flentje argued the case against the first travel ban back in February, including a widely watched oral argument before the Ninth Circuit. The decision to have him argue that case came at the last minute.
Originally, then-acting Solicitor General Noel Francisco and acting Associate Attorney General Chad Readler were on deck, but both had just left Jones Day, which filed amicus briefs in the case against the first order. The government then turned to Flentje, a career government lawyer.
He's been at the department since 1998, mainly serving as a Civil Division trial attorney. He earned an undergraduate degree at Princeton University and a law degree from Georgetown University Law Center.
Hashim Mooppan: Speaking of Jones Day, Hashim Mooppan was an associate and partner there until joining the Justice Department in February, along with more than a dozen other colleagues.
He became deputy assistant attorney general for civil appellate in May. He appeared in an en banc argument before the D.C. Circuit last month, defending the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Mooppan is no stranger to the high court. He argued his first case there, an antitrust matter involving the Federal Trade Commission, when he was a 33-year-old associate. He also made waves in a 2012 case against the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. Both cases were lost at the Supreme Court.
Mooppan got his undergraduate and law degrees from Harvard University and clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.
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 All'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
4 minute read'There Is No Time to Waste': Matt Gaetz Withdraws From AG Nomination
3 minute readFrom ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readConservative Boutiques That Backed Trump Reap Their Rewards
Trending Stories
- 1GE Agrees to $362.5M Deal to End Shareholder Claims Over Power, Insurance Risks
- 2As Political Extremism Rises, is Voter Data the Next Privacy Frontier?
- 3So You Want to be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
- 4US District Judge in North Carolina Will Take Senior Status
- 5From 'Confusing Labyrinth' to Speeding 'Roller Coaster': Uncertainty Reigns in Title IX as Litigators Await Second Trump Admin
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