Assistant Solicitor General, Office of the Texas Attorney General
Assistant Solicitor General, Office of the Texas Attorney General
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, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Brian J. Paul is an appellate lawyer and leads law teams in high-stakes commercial litigation. He has briefed and argued everything from weighty abstract constitutional issues to dollars-and-cents business issues and everything in-between, both on appeal and in trial courts around the country. A member of the American Law Institute, recent past-president of the Seventh Circuit Bar Association and top-tier ranked Chambers appellate lawyer, Brian had one client say about him: “Brian is one of the most respected and skilled appellate lawyers, not only in Indianapolis but across the country. He is trusted to deliver timely guidance on complex issues.” Another said: “He is excellent. I enjoyed working with him. He is able to put things into layman’s terms and explains things really well. His written and oral advocacy are short, crisp and to the point.”
Clients hire Brian to digest the complex, and make the complex simple and compelling for busy, generalist judges. In his writing, he strives to cut through jargon and legalese, and distill things down to what’s important. In his oral advocacy, by intense preparation, he strives to be the advocate whom judges trust for the right answers. In the dozens of cases he has argued, Brian has helped clients win on both sides of the “v.” His recent representations include:
Associate, Faegre Drinker
Melinda Hudson represents clients in a broad range of litigation, dispute resolution and regulatory matters. For state and federal trial and appellate courts, she has drafted motions and briefs on threshold issues of justiciability, the merits of federal and state constitutional and statutory claims, and other legal issues. Melinda’s experience also includes taking depositions of plaintiffs and other witnesses, working with expert witnesses, and presenting oral argument to state and federal courts of appeals.
Before joining Faegre Drinker, Melinda served as a deputy attorney general in the Solicitor General Division in the Office of the Indiana Attorney General. She represented the State of Indiana and its officers and agencies in courts including the Indiana Supreme Court, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and the Supreme Court of the United States. She drafted critical motions, appellate briefs, and amici curiae briefs led by Indiana and joined by dozens of other states. Melinda also argued as lead counsel in appellate cases before the Seventh Circuit and Indiana Court of Appeals, and prepared the solicitor general of Indiana for oral arguments in state and federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.
Justice, Michigan Supreme Court
Stephen Markman was appointed Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court on October 1, 1999. He served as the Chief Justice from 2017-2019. Before his appointment, he served as Judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals from 1995-1999. Prior to this, he practiced law with the firm of Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone in Detroit.
From 1989-1993, Justice Markman served as United States Attorney, or federal prosecutor, in Michigan, after having been nominated by President George H. W. Bush and confirmed by the United States Senate. From 1985-1989, he served as Assistant Attorney General of the United States, after having been nominated by President Ronald Reagan and confirmed by the United States Senate. In that position, he headed the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy, which served as the principal policy development office within the Department, and which coordinated the federal judicial selection process. Prior to this, he served for seven years as Chief Counsel of the United States Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, and as Deputy Chief Counsel of the United States Senate Judiciary Committee.
Justice Markman has authored articles for such publications as the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, the Detroit College of Law Review, the Stanford Law Review, the University of Chicago Law Review, the American Criminal Justice Law Review, the Barrister’s Law Journal, the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, and the American University Law Review. He has also served as a contributing editor of National Review magazine, and has authored chapters in such books as “In the Name of Justice: The Aims of the Criminal Law,” “Still the Law of the Land,” and “Originalism: A Quarter Century of Debate.”
Justice Markman has taught constitutional law at Hillsdale College since 1993. He has served on the Board of Directors of the Western Michigan University Thomas M. Cooley Law School. He traveled to Ukraine on two occasions on behalf of the State Department, to provide assistance in the development of that nation’s post-Soviet constitution. He is a Fellow of the Michigan Bar Foundation, a Master of the Bench of the Inns of Court, and a member of the One Hundred Club. He has spoken before hundreds of youth, civic, charitable, and legal groups throughout Michigan and nationally, and has coached Little League baseball and basketball. He lives with his wife Mary Kathleen in Mason, and has two sons, James and Charles.
Justice Markman was re-elected to the Supreme Court in 2000, 2004, and 2012. His present term expires January 1, 2021.
Topics
Oral Arguments in Texas Supreme Court on Church Autonomy Doctrine
Recently, the Texas Supreme Court heard oral argument in Southern Methodist University v. South Central...
Topics
Power to Persuade: The FCC’s Authority to Interpret Section 230 Post-Loper Bright
In a November 21 FedSoc Blog post, the Phoenix Center’s Lawrence J. Spiwak convincingly argued...
Topics
Will the Supreme Court Finally Address the Private Nondelegation Doctrine?
The Supreme Court is poised to tackle a key separation of powers issue this term:...
Texas Court Confronts Misleading Political Communications and the First Amendment
Daniel Ortner
Can states prohibit “misleading” political communications? Not if the First Amendment has anything to say...
Florida Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Riot” in the Combating Public Disorder Act
Daniel Ortner
It’s not often that a judicial decision is celebrated as a “monumental victory” by...
Racially Discriminatory Corporate Policies: Who's Liable?
Dan Morenoff
Laws banning discrimination have been on the books across America for more than a century...
Indiana Supreme Court Upholds Law Restricting Which Candidates Can Appear on Primary Ballots
Brian J. Paul, Melinda Hudson
Indiana requires candidates on a primary election ballot to demonstrate party affiliation by either (1)...
Toward a More Confident State Constitutionalism
Steve J. Markman
This article is adapted from a speech Justice Markman delivered to the Florida Annual Education...
Topics
The ACLU: Champion of Individual Arbitration?
According to a spate of recent headlines, the ACLU has joined other private employers in...
Topics
United States v. Pheasant: A Rare Bird That Might Be a Good Vehicle to Revive the Nondelegation Doctrine
Respected jurists and scholars alike have lamented that the Constitution’s prohibition against Congress transferring its...