Who Got the Work: Lawyer in NY Vote-By-Mail Case Was Involved in Landmark SCOTUS Affirmative Action Case
New York State Supreme Court Justice Christina L. Ryba of Albany County admitted James F. Hasson, an associate with Consovoy McCarthy, to help represent Republican petitioners.
October 11, 2023 at 01:34 PM
4 minute read
An attorney for plaintiffs in this year's overturn of affirmative action programs in college admissions is now helping a group of New York Republicans who asked a state court to declare the Empire State's recent vote-by-mail law unconstitutional.
On Tuesday, New York State Supreme Court Justice Christina L. Ryba of Albany County admitted James F. Hasson, an associate with Consovoy McCarthy, to help represent Republican petitioners in a September lawsuit challenging the recent law that will allow New York voters to vote by mail for any reason beginning Jan. 1, ahead of next year's presidential and congressional races.
Hasson's firm is in Virginia and he is also admitted to practice in Texas, but not New York.
Hasson will help New York Republican plaintiffs, whose attorney of record in the vote-by-mail case is Michael Y. Hawrylchak, of counsel with the Albany firm O'Connell & Aronowitz.
Ryba's appointment came in an order issued Tuesday.
Hasson was one of the lawyers who represented the plaintiff in Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, a landmark 6-2 decision in June by the Supreme Court of the United States that ruled its affirmative action program violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
Hasson did immediately return a message from the Law Journal on Wednesday.
On Sept. 20, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the New York Early Mail Voter Act, which will allow any voter to request an early vote by mail ballot for any election up to the day before the election.
It drew a same-day complaint in state Supreme Court from a litany of Republicans, including U.S. Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-Schuylerville, the GOP conference's chair, the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee, who allege that mail-in voting is less secure and will unfairly benefit Democrats.
Hochul says GOP-controlled states are attempting to reduce voting rights.
Since the lawsuit's filing, attorneys from Cullen and Dykman of Albany, on behalf of Peter S. Kosinski, co-chair of the New York State Board of Elections, filed court papers suggesting that the New York Democratic-led legislature and Hochul "intentionally disregarded" a 2021 constitutional amendment that had asked to allow all qualified voters to cast ballots by mail for any reason.
The no-excuse absentee voting question failed with 55% opposition from New York voters in 2021.
"These blatant violations of the State Constitution render the Mail Voting Law invalid from its inception," the Cullen attorneys wrote of the legislature and Hochul's ensuing actions.
Cullen attorneys further stated that "all New Yorkers would be irreparably harmed if an election takes place and candidates are placed into office through a process that is held to be unconstitutional."
A response on behalf of Douglas A. Kellner and Andrew J. Spano, commissioners of the state Board of Elections, by board attorney Brian Quail said the law is in fact constitutional, with case law in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania bolstering the argument.
Quail said the new law mandates electronic tracking be made available so that a voter can discern the status of his or her early vote by mail ballot—whether it has been sent, received, or canvassed. This serves to deter fraud and ensures a voter who has cast such a ballot can know when it was duly received and counted.
Quail goes on to state that the New York constitution, whose origins date to 1777, the first of five iterations, "has never remained long unchanged," and the current 85-year era of the 1938 constitution has been amended dozens of times.
He said courts of last resort in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Delaware have concluded that the plenary power of the legislature to enact mail voting for all was not constrained by a constitutional provision permitting absentee voting for some.
Massachusetts' highest court denied a bid by Republicans in that state to block election officials from putting into effect its mail-in and early voting law in July 2022.
In Delaware, a judge struck a law that would have allowed no-excuse mail-in ballots in October 2022.
That same month, Maryland's top court affirmed a decision to allow local state boards of elections to canvass and count mail-in ballots.
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 AllFamily Court Judge Moving to State Supreme Court in Western New York
Election Roundup: Democrats Elected as New DAs in Albany, Erie Counties
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1The Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Push Into Law Firms
- 2Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 3'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 4Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 5Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
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