Recent Successes

Political Asylum and Immigrants’ Rights Project

January 9, 2008 Sidley successfully represented a woman who was the victim of serious domestic violence in her native Guatemala for several years and then fled to the United States seeking asylum, as Guatemalan authorities were unwilling or unable to protect her. Whether “women subject to domestic abuse abroad” have protective status under U.S. immigration law remains a significant and hotly contested issue. Even so, the Immigration Court in San Francisco held that the woman was a member of a social group consisting of “Guatemalan women married to abusive husbands who were unable to leave” and this definition satisfied the statutory requirement for granting asylum. USCIS did not appeal. Copies of our brief were requested by clinics at both UC Hastings and Stanford. Sam Miller and Paul Yanosy handled the case. The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights referred the case to Sidley.

January 11, 2008 Sidley achieved a major victory for a family from Nepal seeking asylum in the United States. At the conclusion of a series of hearings in Los Angeles, Immigration Judge Ira Bank withheld removal of the parents and granted asylum to their son. A key aspect of the hearings was the testimony of the father, his brother, and our expert witness, Professor Neil Mitchell. Franklin Kang led the Sidley team. Working with Mr. Kang on the case were William Tran and Christine Son. Public Counsel referred the case to Sidley. 

February 13, 2008 Sidley successfully represented a man and his wife in U.S. Immigration Court, obtaining asylum for the couple who fled to the United States in December 2004 after facing persecution in their native Albania because of their son’s political affiliation with the Democratic Party of Albania. The son was a DP secretary and spoke out against the corrupt Albanian elections of 2000. The son eventually fled to the United States after opposition Socialist Party members beat him for giving interviews about the elections. The Socialist-backed secret police then came to the clients' house repeatedly, requesting information regarding the son’s whereabouts. The secret police finally beat the father, nearly killing him, and threatened to kill him if their son spoke out again. Andrew Hein and Alla Karagodin handled the case under the supervision of Russell Cass.

March 7, 2008 Sidley obtained an appellate victory for a Muslim family seeking asylum in the United States after suffering political and religious persecution in the family’s native Macedonia. Prior to our involvement in the case, an Immigration Judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals had denied the family’s application for asylum. On appeal, the Second Circuit overturned the decisions below and remanded the case for new evidentiary hearings. In its March 7 opinion, the court found that the U.S. government had violated the petitioner’s right to confidentiality when it disclosed his name to Macedonian authorities while attempting to confirm the authenticity of documents reflecting the petitioner’s persecution by the Macedonian authorities. The court noted that the Macedonian authorities had no apparent interest in validating their own alleged persecution of politically-active Muslim citizens. The court also held that if a petitioner is to be impeached by an alleged fraudulent document in the record, the government must show that the petitioner knew or had reason to know the document was in fact fraudulent. Henry Minnerop argued the appeal. With him on the brief were Marty Gold, Brenda Szydlo and Kimberly Allman. 

April 22, 2008 In a significant victory the Ninth Circuit issued a published opinion on April 22 vacating a Board of Immigration Appeals’ deportation order against our client, a lawful permanent resident with a U.S.-citizen daughter. This long-fought case has proceeded through an original round of briefing and appeal before the Ninth Circuit, opposition to the government’s certiorari petition to the United States Supreme Court, and an additional round of briefing before the Ninth Circuit on remand. In this, its second opinion in favor of our client, the Ninth Circuit again concluded that the government had not demonstrated that our client was eligible for removal from the United States. Representing the client was Melanie Jo Triebel, who argued the appeal before the Ninth Circuit, and was joined on the briefing by Paul Zidlicky, Joel Feldman and Serena Lee.

July 2008 Sidley represented a man who was persecuted in his native country of Jamaica because of his sexual orientation. Throughout his life our client was harassed and threatened by family, co-workers and strangers because of suspicions about his sexuality. Last year, after a threat on his life, he fled Jamaica for the United States and was referred to Sidley by Immigration Equality. After months of work, we learned on March 17 that the Newark Asylum Office made a preliminary determination to grant the client asylum. This "recommended approval" is subject to the results of a mandatory background investigation, but absent any national security issues, our client is on his way to a happier life in the U.S. The team consisted of Jackie Lu, Michael Mann, Victoria Murphy and James Renihan, with Gina DelChiaro and Tim Manion providing additional support and assistance.

July 2008 Working on a pro bono basis, Sidley obtained asylum in the United States for a woman who was forced to flee her native Cameroon using a passport obtained under a fake identity after she was beaten and imprisoned several times for her political beliefs and the work she did on behalf of women’s rights. The case had been before the U.S. Executive Office for Immigration Review for five years. Jamie Haney handled the case under the supervision of Mel Washburn.


Helping the World’s Poor

Sidley has been giving legal assistance to CARE USA, one of the largest providers of assistance to the poor in the world, for a number of years. We have helped CARE deal with the gauntlet of U.S. restrictions in countries subject to particularly complex rules and regulations so it can provide humanitarian assistance in those locations. One such country where such advice has been provided is Myanmar (Burma). CARE has been allowed to do work there, and fortunately, was able to have a substantial presence in that country when the recent cyclone hit. Another complex humanitarian situation where Sidley was able to help is the Sudan. CARE received a grant from the U.S. Institute of Peace, which is established and funded by Congress, and CARE asked Sidley to help to it determine if its proposed work in Darfur was permissible. Sidley also assisted CARE with contract analysis, trademark issues, tax advice (micro-investing through an affiliate), and resolution of disputes, such as who was responsible for a lost shipment of aid materials in Angola. Martin Gold has been managing the firm’s work for CARE and providing non regulatory advice. Lisa Crosby has advised CARE on U.S. governmental regulations and licenses.

April 2008 The firm was retained by the Government of Lesotho to provide legal advice on its negotiations on trade in services with the European Communities, in the context of the broader negotiation of an Economic Partnership Agreement between the European Communities and certain countries of the Southern African Development Community. This is the first engagement arising out of Sidley’s International Law Pro Bono Program, which the firm launched earlier this year. Under the program, the firm invited requests from the governments of the world’s poorest countries for pro bono assistance on a range of international treaty law matters. Patricio Grané coordinated the program, and Mr. Grané and Richard Weiner were instrumental in securing the engagement. Geoff Antell and Ted Kill assisted in providing the advice.


Appellate and Supreme Court Matters

February 15, 2008 The firm secured a victory in a Ninth Circuit case raising important Miranda v. Arizona issues. In response to police questioning, the petitioner stated “I plead the Fifth,” to which the interrogating officer responded, “Plead the Fifth – what’s that?” Questioning continued, and the suspect ultimately confessed. The en banc Ninth Circuit, reversing a decade of contrary decisions in state and federal court, ruled 12-3 in favor of suppressing the confession and granting the petitioner a new trial. The majority held that the earlier courts had erred by misconstruing an unambiguous invocation of the right to remain silent and by countenancing police failure to “scrupulously honor” such an invocation. The Sidley team drafted the petition for rehearing en banc, and argued the case on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Peter Pfaffenroth (who argued the appeal), HL Rogers and Jeff Green handled the matter, with support from Pro Bono Counsel Becky Troth.

May 27, 2008 The firm won a significant victory in the United States Supreme Court in Gomez-Perez v. Potter (No. 06-1321). In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Alito, the Court reversed the First Circuit and held that the federal sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibits retaliation against federal employees who complain of age discrimination. In prior decisions, the Court had concluded that similar language in two other statutes barred retaliation, but the government argued that the ADEA was different because it expressly bars retaliation by private employers but does not mention retaliation in its federal sector prohibitions. The Court rejected this argument, as well as the government’s reliance on principles of sovereign immunity. Joe Guerra presented oral argument. With him on the briefs were Virginia Seitz, Ileana Ciobanu and Matthew Archer-Beck.

June 2, 2008 On behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, for which we filed amicus briefs, the firm achieved victories in two cases decided by the United States Supreme Court. Both cases, United States v. Santos (No. 06-1005) and Cuellar v. United States (No. 06-1456), narrow the application of the federal money-laundering statute. Jeff Green and Kevin Henry (then with the firm) were on the amicus brief in Santos, and Mr. Green was on the amicus brief in Cuellar. Mr. Green also was quoted in an article posted June 3 on the American Lawyer Media Web site that discussed the cases. Taken together, he said, the decisions “significantly pare back the reach and scope of the money-laundering statute, and reinvigorate an old and glorious defense—the rule of lenity.” He noted that the Cuellar decision may also affect prosecutions under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

June 19, 2008 The Supreme Court issued its opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, the high profile Second Amendment case, upholding the DC Circuit’s decision below (as Sidley’s amicus brief had urged). The Goldwater Institute, a not-for-profit public policy organization, retained the firm to file an amicus brief on behalf of the respondent. With Brad Berenson on the brief were Richard Klingler, Ileana Ciobanu and Robert Parker.

June 23, 2008 In Rothgery v. Gillespie County, Texas (No. 07–440), the United States Supreme Court reversed a ruling by the Fifth Circuit and held that a criminal defendant’s initial appearance before a magistrate judge, where he learns the charge against him and his liberty is subject to restriction, marks the initiation of adversary judicial proceedings that trigger attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel; and that attachment does not also require that a prosecutor (as distinct from a police officer) be aware of that initial proceeding or involved in its conduct. The 8-1 decision authored by Justice Souter adopted many of the arguments contained in an amicus brief that Sidley client, the American Bar Association, filed on behalf of the petitioner in the case. With William H. Neukom, President of the ABA, on the brief were: Jeff Green, Georgia Albert, Scott Meisler and Josh Robbins.

June 23, 2008 The Supreme Court issued its opinion in Greenlaw v. United States (No. 07-330), in which it held that a court of appeals could not sue sponte increase a defendant’s sentence on appeal. In this case, the Supreme Court had appointed Sidley lawyer Jay Jorgensen to represent the respondent’s position, as the Department of Justice elected not to defend the Eighth Circuit’s opinion. The following passage is found at page 5 of the Court's opinion: “We granted review and invited Jay T. Jorgensen to brief and argue this case, as amicus curiae, in support of the Court of Appeals’ judgment. 552 U. S. ___ (2008). Mr. Jorgensen accepted the appointment and has well fulfilled his assigned responsibility.”


Supporting the Community

August 2008 At the invitation of Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, Sidley is participating in the City’s Public Service Program, assisting the City with litigation on a pro bono basis. Participation in the program is viewed as an opportunity for large law firms as it gives their senior litigation associates experience in taking depositions on their own. As part of this initiative, we are assisting the City in defending itself against a civil lawsuit filed by Oliver Jovanovic, a Columbia University graduate student who was accused of various counts of sexual abuse and kidnapping in a high-profile case. Mr. Jovanovic was tried and convicted, but his conviction was overturned on appeal. He subsequently filed a lawsuit in federal court against the City as well as former sex-crimes prosecutor Linda Fairstein, who is now a prominent crime novelist and television commentator. Ada Davis, Tracey Seraydarian, Dorothy Spenner and Nick Lagemann, in consultation with Roger Hawke, are working on the case, primarily in taking depositions.


Protecting Civil and Economic Rights

July 2008 The firm obtained certification for workers formerly employed by Electric Mobility Corporation to receive trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Sidley accepted the case at the request of the Court of International Trade, which adjudicates TAA disputes between separated workers and the U.S. Department of Labor, the agency that handles TAA funding. DOL had previously denied our clients certification for TAA benefits on the grounds that employment had not decreased at the subject firm during the review period. Sidley attorneys were able to present additional evidence, which led to a further investigation by DOL that resulted in DOL altering course and certifying our clients for TAA benefits. Larry Walders and Raj Pal handled the matter.

September 25, 2008 Sidley obtained a major pro bono victory for the Turning Point Foundation, a Connecticut non-profit that operates group homes for individuals recovering from drug and alcohol addiction. The City of New Haven attempted to use its zoning enforcement power to exclude the Foundation from residential neighborhoods, resulting in a lawsuit against the City for violations of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. As part of a settlement, the City agreed to allow the Foundation’s residents to remain in their homes, to pay $350,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees, and to work with the Connecticut Fair Housing Center to improve the City’s compliance with federal law. The team, which included Sam Boxerman, Rob Parker, Amy Hanke, Becky Troth, Michael Mann and Sarah Goldstein, handled the case in partnership with the Connecticut Fair Housing Center and with amicus support from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Sidley has a long-standing relationship with the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, which referred the case to the firm.


Aiding Poor and Homeless Americans

April 4, 2008 Working on a pro bono basis, Sidley obtained a motion to vacate a default judgment entered against our clients (a mother and her daughter) in landlord-tenant court, and subsequently obtained a very favorable monetary settlement in the clients’ wrongful-eviction suit against the apartment complex and the management company. As a result of the wrongful eviction, all of our clients’ possessions had been left on the street a few days after Thanksgiving in 2006. Noah Clements, who had handled the earlier motion, filed the wrongful-eviction complaint in D.C. Superior Court. Scott Meisler helped file the complaint and helped negotiate the settlement. Becky Troth and Jeff Green provided support and supervision.

July 21, 2008 Working on a pro bono basis, Sidley lawyers successfully settled a landlord-tenant action against our client in D.C. Superior Court. The landlord had attempted to enforce a legally insufficient Notice to Quit against our client on the grounds that the property was exempt from the D.C. Rental Housing Act. After we filed our opposition to the landlord’s summary judgment motion, the court delayed ruling as the parties entered mediation. After several rounds of negotiations, the landlord agreed to pay our client the cost of renting a new apartment for approximately two years if he vacated the current apartment within 60 days. Leslie Sowers handled the case with supervision from Alan Geolot and Ron Flagg. Scott Meisler, Aissatou Diop and Becky Troth helped draft the pleadings.
 

Back to Pro Bono page