2019 Unsung Hero—John Bielski
John Bielski, a partner at the law firm Willig, Williams & Davidson, was asked to take the lead in drafting a brief on behalf of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO challenging the statute.
June 14, 2019 at 08:51 AM
4 minute read
By The Legal Intelligencer
John Bielski, Willig, Williams & Davidson
In 2012, the Philadelphia Public Interest Law Center asked Willig, Williams & Davidson to write an amicus brief in its case, Applewhite v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The case concerned a state constitutional challenge to the Pennsylvania General Assembly's enactment of Voter ID statute, requiring residents to present a certain type of photo identification before voting. This requirement would have disenfranchised many otherwise eligible Pennsylvania voters who could not afford or obtain the necessary identification—a burden that fell most heavily on urban, low income, minority, elderly, and disable voters. This statute was nominally passed to protect against purported voter fraud.
Bielski, a partner at the law firm Willig, Williams & Davidson, was asked to take the lead in drafting a brief on behalf of the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO challenging the statute. With input from colleagues, he tirelessly drafted and filed two briefs in support of Applewhite during this litigation: one supporting a request for a preliminary injunction of the Voter ID law before the Commonwealth Court (which was denied) and another request seeking a reversal of the Commonwealth Court's decision before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (which was granted). Ultimately, on remand to the Commonwealth Court, the statute was preliminarily enjoined throughout the 2012 election, and permanently enjoined a year later. As a result, the Voter ID statute has no force of law, and the General Assembly never sought to reenact it.
As argued in Bielski's brief, the Voter ID law undermined the right to vote-the most fundamental right of a democratic citizenry. That right is enshrined in the Pennsylvania Constitution in its Free and Equal Elections provision—a version of which has existed since the original state constitution was drafted and adopted in 1776.
The results of this case had a great impact on the law, because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the Commonwealth Court ultimately found the Voter ID law violated the fundamental right to vote and enjoined its enforcement. The final decision of the Commonwealth Court imposed a permanent injunction against the Voter ID Law.
What career path would you have pursued if you weren't a lawyer?
If I weren't a lawyer I would have pursued being an American history or American literature professor. My only aunt and uncle were English professors, and my Dad was a Geography professor.
Name a mentor or someone you admire.
There are far too many mentors to pick one or even a few. I have been very fortunate to be hired by Willig, Williams & Davidson. I work with brilliant, hard-working attorneys who have a passion for the law and defending the rights of workers.
What is the best advice you ever received?
The best advice I ever received was to always believe that a case you are working on can be won, even if the odds are long. Some of the most important cases that I have been fortunate enough to handle were seen as a difficult, if not impossible, climb. Those wins were the sweetest in my career.
In 50 words or less, what does the legal profession need to do to prepare the next generation of lawyers?
The legal profession is changing rapidly and new lawyers need to adapt to those changes. They also need to understand that a law degree and law license is a privilege and, when possible, it should be used to benefit not just clients but those who can ill-afford to hire a lawyer.
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 AllMatt's Corner: Court of Judicial Discipline-Presumed Prejudicial Delay
3 minute readEthical Considerations in Representing an Organizational Client and Its Constituents
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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