Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Jacob Huebert is Senior Litigation Counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance. He previously served as President and Director of Litigation of the Liberty Justice Center, where he successfully litigated cases to protect constitutional rights, including the landmark Janus v. AFSCME case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld government employees’ First Amendment right to choose for themselves whether to pay money to a union. Jacob was also previously a Senior Attorney at the Goldwater Institute, where he litigated cases on free speech, property rights, and the Second Amendment.
Jacob and his work have appeared in numerous national media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Fox News Channel. He is also the author of a book, Libertarianism Today.
Jacob holds a B.A. in economics from Grove City College and a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School. After law school, he served as a clerk to Judge Deborah Cook of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Jacob has served as an adjunct law professor at several law schools, teaching courses in advanced appellate advocacy, the law of payments, legal writing, and jurisprudence. Before working in public interest law, Jacob was a litigator in private practice.
Deputy Counsel, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL)
Anthony LoCoco is deputy counsel at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, where he litigates in defense of individual liberties and the rule of law. Before joining WILL, Anthony served as law clerk to the Honorable Annette Kingsland Ziegler of the Wisconsin Supreme Court for two terms. He is an officer in the Milwaukee Chapter of The Federalist Society.
Anthony is a graduate of Harvard Law School and holds a B.A., summa cum laude, in economics from the University of Dallas. He resides outside Milwaukee with his wife and three children.
Chief Legal Counsel, Alliance Defending Freedom
Jim Campbell serves as chief legal counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, where he leads the U.S. Legal Advocacy team. In that role, Campbell oversees all U.S. litigation teams and Allied Legal Affairs.
Prior to joining ADF in March 2023, Campbell was the solicitor general in the office of Nebraska Attorney General Douglas J. Peterson and Michael T. Hilgers. In that role, he represented the state of Nebraska in cases before state and federal courts and oversaw all civil appeals for the state. In February 2023, Campbell argued Biden v. Nebraska before the U.S. Supreme Court, a case in which Nebraska and five other states challenged the Biden administration’s attempt to forgive over $400 billion in federal student loans for over 40 million individuals.
Before joining the Nebraska attorney general’s office in January 2020, Campbell worked as senior counsel with ADF. In that role, he defended his clients’ religious freedom and freedom of speech, with a particular focus on appellate work. Campbell has also authored many articles and legal commentary pieces, including some published by USA Today and The Washington Post.
A native of northeastern Ohio, Campbell earned his Juris Doctor from the University of Akron School of Law, where he graduated summa cum laude in 2006. Following law school, he clerked for the Honorable Alice M. Batchelder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. Campbell is admitted to the state bars of Ohio, Arizona, and Nebraska. He is also admitted to multiple federal district and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.
In his 35 years at the Justice Department and in private practice, Mike Carvin was one of the leading appellate and trial lawyers challenging state and federal regulations on constitutional and statutory grounds, with 10 Supreme Court arguments and numerous high-profile victories. In addition to his numerous cases in the United States Supreme Court, he argued in virtually every federal appeals court. His major cases include the recent constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act and the decisions invalidating Sarbanes-Oxley's accounting board, preventing the Justice Department from obtaining monetary relief against the tobacco industry under RICO, overturning the federal government's plan to statistically adjust the census, limiting the Justice Department's ability to create "majority-minority" districts, and upholding Proposition 209's ban on racial preferences in California.
Mike was one of the lead lawyers, and argued before the Florida Supreme Court, on behalf of George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election Florida recount controversy. He also has represented state governments, financial institutions, telecommunications, and energy companies in "takings," First Amendment, civil rights, and statutory challenges to federal government actions.
Partner, Clement & Murphy, PLLC
Erin Murphy is founding partner of Clement & Murphy, PLLC. She is widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading Supreme Court and appellate advocates. She has argued dozens of cases in appellate and trial courts throughout the country, including the Supreme Court and nearly all of the federal courts of appeals. Erin has long been ranked by Chambers & Partners rankings as a leading appellate practitioner, and the National Law Journal has named her one of the nation’s “Outstanding Women Lawyers.” Erin also has an active pro bono practice, through which she has successfully represented many religious organizations and adherents, criminal defendants, asylum applicants, adoptive parents, and more.
Erin is an adjunct professor at her alma mater the Georgetown University Law Center, a member and former officer of the Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court, and a frequent speaker on topics relating to the Supreme Court and appellate advocacy. In her spare time, Erin serves on the board of directors of Street Law.
Professor of Law, Widener University Commonwealth Law School
Senior Counsel, First Liberty Institute
Jordan Lorence is Senior Counsel in FLI’s Washington, D.C. office, where he represents First Liberty in strategic efforts promoting religious liberty, and works on important First Amendment projects and litigation, including those at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Lorence has a long career of litigating religious liberty cases since 1984. He has worked for many public interest law firms, including Alliance Defending Freedom, Home School Legal Defense Association, the North Star Legal Center and Concerned Women for America.
He has worked on important religious liberty cases. Lorence worked on school choice cases at the Supreme Court, such as Witters v. Washington Department of Services for the Blind (1986), and Trinity Lutheran (2016), which laid the foundation for First Liberty’s crucial win in Carson v. Makin (2022), requiring Maine to include religious schools in its school choice program.
Lorence argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in Regents of the University of Wisconsin v. Southworth (2000). He represented prolife Christian law students from the University of Wisconsin Law School who objected to the University’s requirement that they pay a mandatory student fee that funded the advocacy of student pro-abortion groups. Other Supreme Court cases Lorence has worked on include NIFLA v. Becerra (2018), protecting prolife pregnancy centers from a California statute requiring them to post signs explaining how pregnant women could obtain state-funded abortions; Masterpiece Cakeshop (2017), involving a Christian cake artist sued by the State of Colorado for declining to design a case celebrating the wedding of a same-sex couple and other cases such as Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2012), Rosenberger v. University of Virginia (1995), Hurley v. GLIB (1995) and Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Center Moriches School District (1993).
Churches and other religious groups in New York City obtained the right to rent vacant public schools on weekends to conduct worship services after Lorence’s tenacious 20 years of litigation in Bronx Household of Faith. Lorence won protection for churches facing eviction from discriminatory zoning ordinances in Minnesota in Cornerstone Bible Church v. City of Hastings, Minnesota (1991). He also argued at the New Mexico Supreme Court one of the first cases in the nation defending a Christian wedding photographer charged by the State of New Mexico with discrimination for declining to create photos celebrating the commitment ceremony of a lesbian couple in Elane Photography v. Willock (2013).
Lorence defended home schooling families from intrusive school officials during his time working at Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) in the 1980s and 1990s. HSLDA also tasked Lorence with establishing a sister organization in Canada to protect home schooling families there. He traveled extensively in Canada from British Columbia to Prince Edward Island speaking to families how they could protect their right to home school under relevant Canadian law.
Lorence earned his undergraduate degree in journalism from Stanford University and his law degree from the University of Minnesota, his home state. Lorence was born and raised in Minnesota, where he worked one summer building Mighty Dump trucks at Tonka Toys in Mound, Minnesota. For two years immediately after he graduated from law school, Lorence served as the head administrator for a Minnesota Senate committee.
He speaks extensively on First Amendment and other legal issues. Lorence has spoken at least 75 law schools and many legal conferences. Prominent publications such as the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and others have printed his opinion pieces on key legal issues involving religious liberty and freedom of speech. He has appeared on such media outlets as Fox News, CNN, National Public Radio, NBC’s Today Show, BBC radio and many others.
Lorence and his wife Marilyn have been married 40 years. They live in the Washington, D.C. area where they raised their seven children.
Professor and D’Alemberte Chair in Constitutional Law, Florida State University College of Law
Alexander Tsesis is the D’Alemberte chair in constitutional law at the Florida State University College of Law. He is also the general editor of the Cambridge Studies on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the Oxford Theoretical Foundations in Law. Tsesis’ scholarship and teaching focus on a breadth of subjects, including constitutional law, civil rights, constitutional reconstruction, interpretive methodology, free speech theory, and legal history.
Tsesis’ most recent book is Free Speech in the Balance (Cambridge University Press 2020). His previous books include Constitutional Ethos: Liberal Equality for the Common Good (Oxford University Press 2017) and For Liberty and Equality: The Life and Times of the Declaration of Independence (Oxford University Press 2012), We Shall Overcome: A History of Civil Rights and the Law (Yale University Press 2008), The Thirteenth Amendment and American Freedom (New York University Press 2004), and Destructive Messages: How Hate Speech Paved the Way for Harmful Social Movements (New York University Press 2002). He also edited a collection of essays in Promises of Liberty (Columbia University Press 2010). The subjects of his articles range from cyber speech, constitutional interpretation, civil rights law, and human rights. They have appeared or will appear in a variety of law reviews across the country, including the Boston University Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Cornell Law Review, Minnesota Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, Southern California Law Review, Stanford Law Review, and Vanderbilt Law Review.
In his 35 years at the Justice Department and in private practice, Mike Carvin was one of the leading appellate and trial lawyers challenging state and federal regulations on constitutional and statutory grounds, with 10 Supreme Court arguments and numerous high-profile victories. In addition to his numerous cases in the United States Supreme Court, he argued in virtually every federal appeals court. His major cases include the recent constitutional challenge to the Affordable Care Act and the decisions invalidating Sarbanes-Oxley's accounting board, preventing the Justice Department from obtaining monetary relief against the tobacco industry under RICO, overturning the federal government's plan to statistically adjust the census, limiting the Justice Department's ability to create "majority-minority" districts, and upholding Proposition 209's ban on racial preferences in California.
Mike was one of the lead lawyers, and argued before the Florida Supreme Court, on behalf of George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election Florida recount controversy. He also has represented state governments, financial institutions, telecommunications, and energy companies in "takings," First Amendment, civil rights, and statutory challenges to federal government actions.
Partner, Clement & Murphy, PLLC
Erin Murphy is founding partner of Clement & Murphy, PLLC. She is widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading Supreme Court and appellate advocates. She has argued dozens of cases in appellate and trial courts throughout the country, including the Supreme Court and nearly all of the federal courts of appeals. Erin has long been ranked by Chambers & Partners rankings as a leading appellate practitioner, and the National Law Journal has named her one of the nation’s “Outstanding Women Lawyers.” Erin also has an active pro bono practice, through which she has successfully represented many religious organizations and adherents, criminal defendants, asylum applicants, adoptive parents, and more.
Erin is an adjunct professor at her alma mater the Georgetown University Law Center, a member and former officer of the Edward Coke Appellate Inn of Court, and a frequent speaker on topics relating to the Supreme Court and appellate advocacy. In her spare time, Erin serves on the board of directors of Street Law.
Topics
Supreme Court Should Examine National Implications Of California Lead Paint Ruling
The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing whether to review a California Court of Appeal’s decision...
1A Auto, Inc. v. Sullivan
Jacob H. Huebert
Massachusetts law bans for-profit corporations and other business entities from contributing to political candidates and...
Lair v. Mangan
Anthony LoCoco
Is the Supreme Court of the United States set to expand First Amendment protection for...
Topics
Docket Watch: 1A Auto, Inc. v. Sullivan
Massachusetts law bans for-profit corporations and other business entities from contributing to political candidates and...
Compelled Speech in Masterpiece Cakeshop: What the Supreme Court’s June 2018 Decisions Tell Us About the Unresolved Questions
Jim Campbell
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the unresolved compelled-speech questions in Masterpiece Cakeshop v....
California and Lead Paint Public Nuisance Case
Michael A. Carvin, Erin E. Murphy
ConAgra Grocery Products Company, NL Industries, Inc., and The Sherwin-Williams Company filed petitions with the...
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky Strikes Down a Vague Ban on Speech in Polling Places, But Future Bans May Be Upheld
Michael R. Dimino
Note from the Editor: This article discusses the Supreme Court’s opinion in Minnesota Voters Alliance...
The First Amendment in the Aftermath of NIFLA and Masterpiece
Northwestern Student Chapter
Chicago, ILCalifornia and Lead Paint Public Nuisance Case
Painting Over the U.S. Constitution
TeleforumTopics
Is Public Nuisance Doctrine Becoming an Exception to the Rule of Law?
Is there a growing trend of cases attempting to create a backdoor to traditional standards...