Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
Our unbroken string of victories in Mississippi and Missouri challenging state laws restricting abortion is gratifying, but unfortunately, that battle is far from over.
May 04, 2020 at 02:06 PM
3 minute read
Describe your firm's philosophy on pro bono service. We believe passionately in protecting the rule of law and pro bono work. We see the law as a profession, not as a purely commercial enterprise; community engagement and pro bono service are indispensable elements of our practice—every bit as important as our work for paying clients. We constantly look for ways to leverage our resources to achieve the greatest impact, and seek out collaborations that multiply what we can achieve on our own.
What are the two biggest cases your firm worked on in 2019? Tell us more about those cases and how you reached the outcome. We are co-counsel in several significant challenges to Trump administration immigration policies and continue to lead a court-appointed steering committee in the [American Civil Liberties Union's] class action on behalf of immigrant parents separated from their children. Our role in that case, Ms. L v. ICE, expanded last fall, while the first phase of reunifications concluded in early 2020. We secured a victory in September 2019, when the judge overseeing Ms. L ordered the government to allow 11 parents unlawfully deported during the family separation crisis to return to the U.S. to reunify with their children while they pursue their asylum claims.
We are handling several high-impact reproductive rights litigations and won a [U.S. Court of Appeals for the] Fifth Circuit ruling in December 2019, working with the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Mississippi's last abortion clinic, upholding our district court win earlier in the year overturning the state's 15-week abortion ban.
What was the most satisfying aspect of that work? Successfully completing the first phase of reunifications of separated families marked a punctuation point for hundreds of our lawyers involved in that effort. Equally gratifying, our work with the deported parents laid the groundwork for the court ruling that allowed 11 to return to the U.S. to file asylum petitions. Our unbroken string of victories in Mississippi and Missouri challenging state laws restricting abortion is gratifying, but unfortunately that battle is far from over.
What other pro bono matters is the firm working on? In March, we created an online Coronavirus Relief Center to support the tens of millions of Americans and small businesses facing devastation due to COVID-19. Some 400 lawyers have contributed 6,000 hours analyzing and summarizing, in simple language, 800-plus relief programs nationally. Leveraging this resource, we are collaborating with legal organizations to directly serve small businesses and individuals in need. We're petitioning for the release of detained immigrants at greatest risk for infection in Ohio, New Jersey and Michigan. And we're working to enjoin efforts by certain states to label abortion services as "non-essential" in the face of COVID-19.
Why does pro bono work matter to you as a lawyer? Nothing matters more to me. Millions of Americans face economic ruin; gratuitous actions by state and federal authorities put inmates, migrants and others at extreme risk; and our democratic institutions are being undermined. If we, as lawyers, don't step up to safeguard the rule of law and those in need, who will?
Responses submitted by Brad Karp, chairman at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison.
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 AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readArnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
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