Assistant Professor, Florida State University College of Law
Counsel, Keller Postman LLC
John Masslon is a Counsel at Keller Postman LLC, where he works on a broad range of disputes, including products liability and consumer protections suits. He helps develop legal strategies, writes briefs, and presents argument on legal questions. Before joining Keller Postman, John was senior litigation counsel at Washington Legal Foundation. There, he wrote about 100 amicus briefs supporting free enterprise in courts across the country. He filed the first amicus brief in the Supreme Court supporting the challenge to OSHA’s vaccine mandate. He also filed a brief supporting ending the in-house proceedings at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Previously, John served as assistant solicitor general in a state attorney general’s office. There, he was first chair in a federal trial challenging a state election law that was ultimately upheld. He also wrote the briefs that convinced the state supreme court to uphold the State’s right-to-work statute.
John obtained his B.S. in economics with a minor in mathematical sciences from Clemson University. He then received his J.D. and LL.M. in Taxation from Georgetown University Law Center. After law school, John worked for Judge Arthur J. Schwab of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania and clerked for Judge Judith Ference Olson of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
Patrick Jaicomo is a Senior Attorney with the Institute for Justice and one of the leaders of IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability. Through the project, Patrick works to dismantle judicially created immunity doctrines and ensure that government officials are held accountable when they violate the Constitution.
In November 2020, Patrick argued the police brutality case Brownback v. King before the U.S. Supreme Court. In March 2024, Patrick returned to the high court for the First Amendment retaliation case Gonzalez v. Trevino and again in October 2024, when the court granted, vacated, and reversed the denial of a similar retaliation claim in Murphy v. Schmitt. Patrick has litigated immunity and accountability issues—including qualified immunity, judicial immunity, and the restriction of constitutional claims against federal workers—across the United States and at every level of the court system.
Before joining IJ, Patrick was a litigator at a private firm in Grand Rapids, Michigan, where he cultivated a civil rights practice and handled a variety of cases in state and federal court. He earned his law degree from the University of Chicago and a degree in economics and political science from the University of Notre Dame.
Patrick was born and raised in rural, Steuben County, Indiana, where he met his wife and IJ colleague, Kenzie. The Jaicomos live in Arlington, Virginia, with their lovely daughter, Cora.
Patrick’s work has been featured in numerous publications, including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and USA Today. He has also appeared on numerous podcasts and television programs, authored academic articles, and frequently gives presentations on his areas of expertise.
Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
Patrick Jaicomo is a Senior Attorney with the Institute for Justice and one of the leaders of IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability. Through the project, Patrick works to dismantle judicially created immunity doctrines and ensure that government officials are held accountable when they violate the Constitution.
In November 2020, Patrick argued the police brutality case Brownback v. King before the U.S. Supreme Court. In March 2024, Patrick returned to the high court for the First Amendment retaliation case Gonzalez v. Trevino and again in October 2024, when the court granted, vacated, and reversed the denial of a similar retaliation claim in Murphy v. Schmitt. Patrick has litigated immunity and accountability issues—including qualified immunity, judicial immunity, and the restriction of constitutional claims against federal workers—across the United States and at every level of the court system.
Before joining IJ, Patrick was a litigator at a private firm in Grand Rapids, Michigan, where he cultivated a civil rights practice and handled a variety of cases in state and federal court. He earned his law degree from the University of Chicago and a degree in economics and political science from the University of Notre Dame.
Patrick was born and raised in rural, Steuben County, Indiana, where he met his wife and IJ colleague, Kenzie. The Jaicomos live in Arlington, Virginia, with their lovely daughter, Cora.
Patrick’s work has been featured in numerous publications, including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and USA Today. He has also appeared on numerous podcasts and television programs, authored academic articles, and frequently gives presentations on his areas of expertise.
General Counsel, Center for Individual Rights
Darpana Sheth joined CIR as General Counsel in May 2025. She is a nationally recognized constitutional litigator with over two decades of experience serving in in leadership roles at other nonprofit organizations.
Before joining CIR, Darpana served for four years as Vice President of Litigation for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Prior to that, Darpana was a Senior Attorney with the Institute for Justice, where she also served as Director of the Institute’s National Initiative to End Forfeiture Abuse.
Before finding her calling as a public-interest attorney, Darpana served as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of New York and worked in private practice as a litigation associate at the Manhattan law firm of Chadbourne & Parke, LLP. She also served as law clerk to the Honorable Jerome A. Holmes of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
A native of Philadelphia, Darpana graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and History. She earned her law degree from Georgetown University Law Center.
Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
Patrick Jaicomo is a Senior Attorney with the Institute for Justice and one of the leaders of IJ’s Project on Immunity and Accountability. Through the project, Patrick works to dismantle judicially created immunity doctrines and ensure that government officials are held accountable when they violate the Constitution.
In November 2020, Patrick argued the police brutality case Brownback v. King before the U.S. Supreme Court. In March 2024, Patrick returned to the high court for the First Amendment retaliation case Gonzalez v. Trevino and again in October 2024, when the court granted, vacated, and reversed the denial of a similar retaliation claim in Murphy v. Schmitt. Patrick has litigated immunity and accountability issues—including qualified immunity, judicial immunity, and the restriction of constitutional claims against federal workers—across the United States and at every level of the court system.
Before joining IJ, Patrick was a litigator at a private firm in Grand Rapids, Michigan, where he cultivated a civil rights practice and handled a variety of cases in state and federal court. He earned his law degree from the University of Chicago and a degree in economics and political science from the University of Notre Dame.
Patrick was born and raised in rural, Steuben County, Indiana, where he met his wife and IJ colleague, Kenzie. The Jaicomos live in Arlington, Virginia, with their lovely daughter, Cora.
Patrick’s work has been featured in numerous publications, including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and USA Today. He has also appeared on numerous podcasts and television programs, authored academic articles, and frequently gives presentations on his areas of expertise.
Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers Inc. - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Jake Linford
On February 26, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Dewberry Group, Inc....
Topics
Education Department Dear Colleague Letter Implements Trump Administration Anti-Discrimination Policies in Education
Time’s up. Schools throughout the country were fighting the calendar after a recent Dear Colleague...
Topics
Article III and the Canal Zone District Court: What Does the Constitution Require of Territorial Courts?
With President Donald Trump’s pledge to take back the Panama Canal, it’s worth looking back...
Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v. United States, ex rel. Todd Heath - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
John Masslon
On February 21, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in Wisconsin Bell, Inc. v....
Topics
Supreme Court Agrees to Take Case Challenging State Law Restricting Counselor’s Speech
On March 10, the Supreme Court granted review in a case likely to become the...
Litigation Update: Martin v. United States
Patrick Jaicomo
When federal law enforcement raids the wrong home, do innocent homeowners have any legal recourse?...
Litigation Update: Martin v. United States
Patrick Jaicomo
When federal law enforcement raids the wrong home, do innocent homeowners have any legal recourse?...
Litigation Update: Martin v. United States
Topics
How FCC v. Consumers’ Research Could Sink Proposals to Reform Labor Law
On its face, FCC v. Consumers’ Research seems to have nothing to do with labor...
TikTok, Inc. v. Garland - Post-Decision SCOTUScast
Darpana Sheth Nunziata
On January 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued their 9-0 opinion in TikTok, Inc. v. Garland....