Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
Michael Bindas is a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice (IJ) and leads IJ’s educational choice team. In this role, he oversees a talented group of IJ attorneys who help policymakers design constitutionally defensible educational choice programs and who defend educational choice programs in courtrooms nationwide. He joined IJ in 2005.
Michael was part of IJ’s litigation team in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held the exclusion of religious options from Montana’s educational choice program unconstitutional, and he led IJ’s defense of the Choice Scholarship Program for elementary and secondary students in Douglas County, Colorado. He also successfully challenged Washington’s denial of special education services to children in religious schools, as well as the state’s exclusion of sectarian options from its state work study program. Currently, he leads IJ’s team in Carson v. Makin, challenging Maine’s exclusion of religious options from its educational choice program.
Prior to leading IJ’s educational choice team, Michael litigated extensively to secure economic liberty, property rights, and freedom of speech throughout the nation. He was counsel of record at the U.S. Supreme Court for Kimbrough Fine Wine & Spirits in Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Association v. Thomas, a successful challenge to Tennessee’s durational residency requirements for retail liquor licenses. He also led successful challenges to the municipal sign codes of St. Louis, Mo. and Norfolk, Va., after those cities attempted to silence protests of their abusive eminent domain practices.
Prior to joining IJ, Michael spent three years as an attorney with Perkins Coie LLP. He is a former law clerk to Judge Rhesa Hawkins Barksdale of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and served as an engineer officer in the United States Army and Pennsylvania Army National Guard before beginning his legal career.
Michael received his law degree cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania Law School in 2001, where he served as Articles Editor for the Journal of Constitutional Law and was elected to the Order of the Coif. He received his undergraduate degree from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1995.
Executive Director & Secretary, American Civil Rights Project
Dan Morenoff is the executive director at the American Civil Rights Project and an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute.
His work focuses on protecting and, where necessary, restoring the primacy of all Americans' shared civil rights against the identitarian alternative.
Before practicing law, Morenoff served on the legislative staff of Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX). Morenoff holds a B.A. from Columbia College of Columbia University in the City of New York and a J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School. He has also served as an officer or director of several community organizations in Dallas, Texas.
Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
Senior Research Fellow in Anglo-American Relations, Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, The Heritage Foundation
Theodore "Ted" R. Bromund studies and writes on Anglo-American relations, U.S. and British relations with Europe and the European Union, America’s leadership role in the world, and international organizations and treaties as senior research fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom.
Bromund, who joined Heritage in 2008, previously served nine years as associate director of International Security Studies at Yale University, a center dedicated to the study and teaching of diplomatic history and grand strategy. He was a lecturer in history beginning in 1999, and in international affairs for the master of arts program beginning in 2004.
A columnist for Newsday, Forbes, and Great Britain’s Yorkshire Post, Bromund also writes regularly for National Review, The Weekly Standard, and FoxNews.com, and, in Britain, CapX. He has been interviewed or cited by BBC News, CBS News, Fox News Channel, CNN, Fox Business, Politifact, Radio Free Europe, The Christian Science Monitor, Time, and Financial Times, among others.
Besides contributing articles to scholarly journals, Bromund is the author of a chapter on former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the fall of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in the book The Blair Legacy: Politics, Policy, Governance, and Foreign Affairs (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009).
In 2013, Bromund was recognized by the Second Amendment Foundation as its Scholar of the Year for his analysis of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Bromund received his doctorate in history in 1999 from Yale. His thesis on Britain’s first application to the European Economic Community won the Samuel H. Beer Dissertation Prize from the American Political Science Association’s British Politics Group. In 2016, he received Heritage’s Joseph Shattan Award in recognition of the quality of his writing.
He is an adjunct professor of strategic studies in the Strategic Studies Program at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, where he teaches courses on grand strategy. He also holds two master’s degrees in history from Yale as well as a bachelor of arts degree from Iowa’s Grinnell College.
A native of Wooster, Ohio, he currently resides in Washington, D.C.
Partner, Grossman Young & Hammond
Sandra Grossman is a partner at Grossman Young & Hammond, LLC, located in Bethesda, Maryland. She is a skilled immigration litigator with over a decade of experience in all matters related to the practice of immigration law. She is known for providing top-notch, personalized service to both individual and corporate clients with complex immigration cases and highly specialized needs. Her pragmatic and creative approach to immigration challenges has earned her an international reputation as a lawyer who can get the job done for the most discriminating of clients.
Sandra has developed a unique practice that addresses complex inadmissibility issues, often involving matters before INTERPOL, high-profile clients, politically sensitive matters, and diplomatic issues with foreign policy implications, and requiring knowledge and expertise on a range of issues involving public international law and U.S. domestic law. Sandra is fiercely dedicated to guiding her clients through the complex maze of U.S. immigration laws in order to find workable solutions to achieve their goals.
Sandra has successfully represented individuals in diverse aspects of immigration law before the immigration courts, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the Federal District Courts. She also represents clients in the areas of deportation defense, detention and bond issues, the immigration consequences of criminal convictions, requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), waivers of inadmissibility, asylum, and adjustment of status and naturalization applications, among other matters. Her experience includes representation of clients in lawsuits to prompt U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) action on long-delayed applications, including applications for naturalization, adjustment of status, waivers, and replacement green cards.
The Washingtonian Magazine recognized Sandra as one of “Washington’s Top Lawyers.” She is an active member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), a former adjunct professor in immigration law at the Washington College of Law at American University, and a member of the Editorial Board of Bender’s Immigration Bulletin. Sandra regularly handles pro-bono client matters and offers reduced rate services for such organizations as the Maryland Immigrant Rights Coalition (MIRC), CASA de Maryland, Catholic Charities, and Identity.
Sandra is a native Spanish and English speaker and is conversant in French.
Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
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.
Partner, Patrick Doerr
Mr. Rando has represented clients in matters involving computer hardware and software, silicon chip manufacturing, biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, chemical compounds, food additives, alternative energy, AI, autonomous vehicles, blockchain, consumer electronics, communications, internet, and e-commerce. He has appeared in courts across the country, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and multiple U.S. Courts of Appeals.
As appellate counsel, Mr. Rando has served as counsel of record or co-counsel in more than 30 amicus briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit on issues of patent law, statutory interpretation, separation of powers, and constitutional law. Noteworthy filings include eBay Inc. v. MercExchange (2006), Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (2017), American Axle v. Neapco (2021), Amgen v. Sanofi (2023), and Cellect v. Vidal (2024).
Mr. Rando is a Fellow of the Academy of Court-Appointed Masters, having served by judicial appointment as Special Master in numerous complex patent cases, including multi-day Markman hearings and post-discovery proceedings. He also serves as a court-appointed Mediator and Neutral in both patent and commercial disputes.
He has played an active role in judicial and legislative engagement. Mr. Rando co-developed and conducted lecture series for the SDNY and EDNY Patent Pilot Program Judges and Clerks, covering the America Invents Act and Section 101 eligibility post-Alice and Mayo. He represented both the Federal Bar Association (FBA) and New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) at the Tillis/Coons Section 101 Patent Reform Roundtable, and submitted written testimony to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 2019.
Mr. Rando is a former president of the NYIPLA (2023–2024) and has held nearly every leadership position in the organization. He also served as Chair of the FBA’s Intellectual Property Law Section and was a founding member and president of the FBA’s EDNY Chapter. He is a founding member of the Association of Amicus Counsel, and an active contributor to the Federalist Society IP Practice Group Executive Committee.
He frequently lectures at CLE programs, universities, and legal associations on IP, constitutional law, and appellate advocacy. He has been quoted extensively in publications such as Law360, Bloomberg Law, WIPR, and National Law Journal. His scholarly publications include articles in The Federal Lawyer, Touro Law Review, and IPWatchdog.
Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Michael Bindas
On June 30, the Supreme Court released its decision in the case of Espinoza v....
Escaping the Goldilocks Problem: A Proposal That Would Enable States to Avoid Redistricting Litigation
Dan Morenoff
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Peter v. NantKwest Inc. Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Robert J. Rando
On Dec 11, 2019 the Supreme Court decided Peter v. NantKwest Inc., a case considering...
Fingers Cross-ed? The Establishment Clause after American Legion
Orange County Lawyers Chapter
Irvine, CAThe TRAP Act’s Contribution to Preventing Transnational Repression Through Interpol
Ted R. Bromund, Sandra Grossman
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public...
Hartford, Connecticut Holiday Happy Hour
Hartford, CTCourthouse Steps Oral Argument Teleforum: Thryv, Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP
TeleforumTopics
Iowa Supreme Court Extends Comment Deadline for ABA Model Rule 8.4(g): New Deadline December 30, 2019
The Iowa Supreme Court has extended its public comment period through 4:30 p.m., December 30,...
Peter v. NantKwest Inc. - Post Argument SCOTUScast
Robert J. Rando
On October 7, 2019, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Peter v. NantKwest Inc.,...
Topics
Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board Considers Version of ABA Model Rule 8.4(g): Public Comment Deadline Is September 30, 2019
The Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board is holding a public comment period through September 30, 2019, on...