With the national conversation around immigration swirling, the technology community continues to speak out. This week, Fenwick and dozens of technology companies have taken a stand in support of sanctuary cities and sanctuary jurisdictions nationwide, communities which continue to be threatened with loss of federal funding.
On February 12, Fenwick filed an amicus brief on behalf of 49 technology companies encouraging the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to affirm a district court’s decision to permanently enjoin enforcement of Executive Order 13,678, which threatened to strip so-called “sanctuary jurisdictions” of all federal funding.
Santa Clara County and the city and county of San Francisco sued to block enforcement of the executive order in early 2017, arguing that it was unconstitutionally vague, attempted to usurp Congress’ spending power, imposed impermissible restrictions on the use of federal funds and reflected an unlawful attempt to commandeer state resources.
The district court agreed with the plaintiffs and permanently enjoined enforcement of the executive order in November 2017. The federal government’s appeal of that ruling is now before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
As stated in our brief, “Silicon Valley has become the technological innovation capital of the world because of the talents, drive, and ingenuity of people from all over the world. Diversity, openness, and tolerance are among our greatest strengths, and our effort to more fully realize these values is fundamental to who we are.”
By attempting to force jurisdictions to abandon those values in favor of hostility and suspicion, the executive order comprises an “attack on the values of our companies and communities” and is “likely to injure our economic as well as our moral well-being.”
This week, U.S. District Court Judge William H. Orrick issued his decision granting the Santa Clara County and the City and County of San Francisco’s motion for a nationwide preliminary injunction. The injunction bars the federal government from enforcing an executive order that threatened to cut off federal grants and federal funding to local governments targeted as “sanctuary jurisdictions” for declining to participate in federal immigration enforcement.
Through an amicus brief filed by Fenwick, a group of technology companies spoke out against the executive order, supporting the counties’ request for the injunction. The brief pointed out that every major technology hub in America is a city at risk of being designated as a “sanctuary” jurisdiction under the executive order and as a result losing federal funding or grants. The tech amici further addressed how the order seeks to compel conduct antithetical to the values of inclusiveness, diversity and openness that have enabled communities like Silicon Valley to thrive.
The federal court’s April 25 decision is effective nationwide and protects the budgets and funding of all sanctuary jurisdictions, including sanctuary cities, across the country, not just San Francisco and Santa Clara Counties.
“The court’s decision is a win for the neediest people in our nation—seniors in need of food, foster youth in need of shelter, and children who need medical care,” said Santa Clara County Supervisor Cindy Chavez in a statement. “We will continue being a welcoming, safe, and diverse community.”
The Trump Administration is expected to appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit, and Fenwick is prepared to submit another amicus brief.
Fenwick is very proud to support Santa Clara County and the City and County of San Francisco in their fight to protect hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding that support critical services in our local communities.
Since the first Executive Order limiting immigration from certain Muslim countries in January, the technology community has been making its voice heard—from thousands of technology employees pledging never to work on databases for a Muslim registry or other discriminatory purposes to Airbnb offering free housing to refugees and individuals impacted by the anti-immigration order to countless CEOs issuing statements communicating solidarity with immigrants and support of diversity.
This past week, through an amicus brief filed by Fenwick & West, a group of technology companies spoke out against a recent Executive Order that threatens to cut off all federal grants to local governmental entities that decline to participate in federal immigration enforcement.
Many of these communities—sometimes referred to as "sanctuary cities" or "sanctuary jurisdictions"—have adopted policies against cooperation with federal efforts to deport undocumented immigrants, and oppose having their police forces conscripted into federal immigration enforcement.
Although the Executive Order does not define "sanctuary jurisdictions," and it is not clear whether any particular city or county might be targeted by the order, it is likely to have serious and harmful consequences for both the technology industry and our local communities as a whole.
Fenwick filed the amicus brief on behalf of these technology companies in two sanctuary jurisdiction cases pending in the Northern District of California, in which the County of Santa Clara and the City and County of San Francisco are asking the U.S. District Court to issue a nationwide injunction, barring the federal government from enforcing the Executive Order against potential "sanctuary jurisdictions."
The County of Santa Clara has challenged the constitutionality of the Trump Administration’s Executive Order 13,768, which purports to make so-called “sanctuary jurisdictions”, including “sanctuary cities”, largely ineligible for federal grants.
The Counties of Santa Clara and San Francisco are seeking preliminary injunctions preventing enforcement of the order. While a motion has been filed to consolidate the cases, the hearing dates for the injunction remain scheduled for April 5, 2017 (Santa Clara case), and April 12, 2017 (San Francisco case).
Fenwick’s brief supports issuing these injunctions, noting that nearly every major technology hub in America is a city at risk of being labelled a “sanctuary” jurisdiction and losing federal funding or federal grants. The brief argues (a) that the Executive Order undermines the right of local governments to make their own public safety determinations and set their own law enforcement priorities, (b) that the order threatens the well-being of the communities in which technology companies are embedded, (c) that the order undermines the ability of technology companies to recruit the best employees, and (d) that it makes even lawful immigrants feel unsafe in America. Finally, the Executive Order seeks to compel conduct antithetical to the values of inclusiveness, diversity and openness that have enabled Silicon Valley to thrive.
We’re proud to have taken this first step in support of the Counties of Santa Clara and San Francisco’s legal fight.
Fenwick & West secured political asylum for a pro bono client of the firm—a minor fleeing violence in Guatemala—who suffered persecution and faced future persecution in his home country.
Rural Immigrant Connect uses videoconferencing to connect pro bono lawyers in the Bay Area and Silicon Valley with immigrant clients in California's Central Valley, some of whom have fled violence in Central America and desperately need representation.
“It was a privilege to help our client find safety and a new life in the U.S.,” Schomp said. “The Fenwick team empowered the client to be his own best advocate. We’re thankful for Fenwick’s support on the project as a whole. It’s extremely encouraging to see a firm so dedicated to pro bono work.”
Access to justice is hard to come by for those living in poverty. And for the impoverished who live in rural and isolated communities, getting legal assistance is nearly impossible. Fenwick & West and its partners sought to change that.
The Beacon of Justice Award winners are selected by criteria assessing increased access to representation through the utilization of groundbreaking and original ideas, tools, and technology to create new delivery models and initiatives that provide significant pro bono representation. The winners advance policies and practices that provide pathways to justice and opportunity, while also enhancing the representation provided to clients. Specifically, the virtual pro bono project (VPBP) was selected for its successful and resourceful use of online services to provide legal aid and connect low-income individuals with pro bono attorneys.
Due to distance, lack of convenient public transportation options, and inability of busy attorneys to commute to remote areas, providing legal assistance to far-away clients was, to put it mildly, challenging. Yet, these far-away clients, many of whom live in poverty, desperately needed legal aid. So in 2012, Fenwick, Cisco, PBP, and DLA Piper banded together to come up with a solution - they created the VPBP.
The VPBP bridges the accessibility gap between attorneys and their clients by combining elements of a traditional pro bono clinic with web conferencing technology. Potential clients in need of legal assistance visit select Santa Clara County libraries in the San Francisco Bay Area for one of eight free monthly clinics, where they are matched with volunteer attorneys. Using WebEx, the attorneys "meet" with clients virtually to provide advice and referrals from the comfort of their offices or homes.
In the 4 ½ months between full roll-out of the VPBP in August 2013 and the end of 2013, volunteers from Fenwick, DLA Piper, Cisco, and other law firms donated close to 200 hours of their time to the virtual clinics! Several legal services nonprofits in California have since followed in our footsteps and are piloting their own virtual clinic programs.
Brian Lahti, a Fenwick litigation associate who has been involved with the VPBP, said the following of his experience: “The virtual pro bono clinic is both rewarding for the attorney and necessary for rural communities. The use of technology allows us to reach individuals and communities with great needs and that have little resources otherwise available. From the attorney’s side the technology allows you to form the very important connection with the client necessary to provide an efficient service, while still maintaining your other obligations.”
Here in Silicon Valley, we're all about using technology to build connections and solve problems.
Julia Ushakova-Stein, a graduate of the UC Berkeley School of Law, is an associate in the Tax practice group at Fenwick & West LLP. She focuses her practice on U.S. tax planning and controversy matters, with an emphasis on international tax planning and restructurings, M&A (inbound and outbound), and transfer pricing. A staunch supporter of pro bono, Julia sits on the firm's Pro Bono Committee and regularly provides pro bono services to various nonprofits. While in law school, she served as the Supervising, Development, and Executive Editor for the Berkeley Business Law Journal.
A commitment to justice and the needs of the underserved were among the criteria that I used to distinguish between firms when deciding where to spend my 2L summer. Now, as a summer associate at Fenwick & West, I’ve had the opportunity to meaningfully participate in Fenwick’s thriving pro bono program and witness this commitment firsthand.
On June 6, 2014, Fenwick & West partnered with OneJustice and the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund (DREDF) to provide special education assistance to low-income parents and families in Yolo County, California. Sixteen Fenwick attorneys and summer associates boarded the Justice Bus, which buses volunteers from urban areas to rural and isolated communities to set up free legal clinics. The Justice Bus is one of many ways that OneJustice accomplishes its mission of bringing life-changing legal help to Californians in need.
Fenwick's Justice Bus volunteers arrive in Woodland, California.
Upon arriving at the clinic, I was excited to interact with clients and to work with them to accomplish their goals. At the same time, I was unsure of whether I would be a useful resource because I had no experience with education law. However, after several hours of conversing with clients and relying on DREDF’s expert attorneys, it became clear that our efforts were making a difference.
Summer Associate Taimur Case and Associate Deborah Kang hard at work.
The Fenwick volunteers provided assistance to parents and guardians in various aspects of special education law, including requests for accommodations, development of individualized education programs, and general guidance about student and parent rights under state and federal law. The group served 20 clients, including one client who said the following about the clinic: “Thank you for your help. It is overwhelming dealing with a child’s disabilities when you have to fight for services at the same time. The volunteers and counsel provided a simple, but thorough explanation of the next steps to take. Thank you!”
Summer Associates Victoria Wong, Amanda Baratz, Albert Chen, Jeremy Kazzaz, and Elizabeth Chang.
For clients, the clinic was a source of help in navigating a complex and challenging area of the law. For me, the project demonstrated Fenwick’s commitment to the community and culture of making a difference in the lives of the underserved. I look forward to learning more about Fenwick’s pro bono program this summer, as well as participating in the many pro bono projects available to attorneys and summer associates.
Fenwick’s team of volunteers included Associates Betsy White, Deborah Kang, Helen Li, Kelli Newman, and Ronnie Solomon, and Summer Associates Albert Chen, Amanda Baratz, Andrew Xue, Ari Haber, Elizabeth Chang, Jennifer Cho, Jeremy Kazzaz, Taimur Case, Victoria Wong, Yousef AbuGharbieh, and Zach Lerner.
Victoria Wong, a 2L at the UC Davis School of Law, is a summer associate in the Corporate practice group at Fenwick & West LLP. She is a senior articles editor of the UC Davis Law Review. Victoria previously chaired the Filipino Law Students Association, and served as Professional Development Chair for the Asian Pacific American Law Students Association. Last summer, she externed for the Hon. Justice Louis Mauro of the California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. As an undergrad at UC Berkeley, she interned at the Alameda Superior Court and volunteered at The Suitcase Clinic to coordinate legal services for the homeless. Victoria enjoys binge-watching TV shows, mini-golfing, and spending time with her fiancé, Eric.
Pregnant and parenting students face significant socioeconomic and educational barriers that make it difficult to complete their education. In California, 70% of teen girls who become pregnant drop out of school. Research shows that most pregnant and parenting students want to complete their education, but unfortunately, they lack crucial support for themselves and their children.
This unique population of students experiences “push out” problems at schools that marginalize them and rob them of the educational opportunities they are entitled to receive. An overwhelming majority of pregnant and parenting teens are low-income youth of color who face additional barriers to achieving educational equity. With the sponsorship of Fenwick & West, Angélica works tirelessly to identify and eliminate educational barriers faced by teen parents like Talia.
In 2013, Fenwick & West LLP partner Brian Buckley and associate Bradley Meissner partnered with Legal Voice, a nonprofit women’s rights legal organization, and the Northwest Justice Project to help secure access to the courts for low-income individuals. Through their efforts, they ultimately secured a unanimous ruling in the Washington State Supreme Court, which stated that Washington courts cannot charge indigent litigants fees or costs associated with filing a case. In strong language, the Court stated that the court rule at issue, General Rule (GR) 34, “was adopted to ensure that indigent litigants have equal access to justice. Any fees required of indigent litigants are invalid and must be waived under the rule.”
Fenwick attorneys represented the interests of Abeda Jafar, who had previously filed an action in Snohomish County for a parenting plan with her child’s father, in part because she feared for the child’s safety. Ms. Jafar’s annual income was $4,620, which is just 30 percent of the federal poverty guideline for a family of two, and she was eligible for a free legal service provider because of her low income. Yet when Ms. Jafar asked the Snohomish County Superior Court to waive her filing fees, it granted only a partial waiver of the mandatory fees and required her to pay $50 in surcharges within 90 days – or she would risk dismissal of her case. The Washington State Supreme Court sided with Ms. Jafar, stating that constitutionally based “principles of due process and equal protection require that indigent litigants have access to the courts. Once the trial court determines that a litigant is indigent, the rule then requires a complete waiver in order to allow access to the courts. No language in the rule exists supporting a grant of a partial waiver for indigent litigants, nor … could such a decision be supportable.”
As a matter of social justice for Ms. Jafar and other indigent defendants, the struggle to enforce the court’s decision does not end there. The Northwest Justice Project continues to be confronted with issues such as lower district courts not acknowledging that the ruling applies to them, court clerks unilaterally deciding that certain indigent defendants are not eligible for waivers, and other courts’ personnel requiring additional unnecessary documentation as fee-waiver prerequisites. Legal Voice and the Northwest Justice Project are currently addressing these problems on a case-by-case basis in an effort to slowly chip away at these issues and cement the ruling with the lower courts. Despite the hundreds of hours expended by Fenwick attorneys and these organizations as well as a clear and successful court ruling, indigent defendants still face many obstacles to justice, including proper enforcement of existing laws.
Ryan is an associate in the Corporate practice group at Fenwick & West LLP. He focuses his practice on a broad variety of corporate matters to support clients in the high technology and life sciences industries. While at the University of Washington School of Law, Ryan served as a legal extern to Judge Michael Hayden of King County Superior Court and was also Notes and Comments editor for Washington Law Review.
In January 2014, Fenwick & West was named to The National Law Journal’s Pro Bono Hot List. Among only 10 law firms in the United States to receive this recognition, Fenwick is honored for its exemplary commitment to providing pro bono services. Over the past five years, Fenwick attorneys and staff have logged nearly 50,000 pro bono hours valued at close to $20 million in legal fees.
“We’re honored to receive this esteemed recognition, especially among firms that are in some cases several times our size,” said partner Patrick Premo, chair of Fenwick’s Pro Bono Program. “Pro bono has always been a fundamental part of our culture here at Fenwick, and it’s been really rewarding to see our corporate and tax attorneys use their unique skill sets in areas where you don’t generally see pro bono support.”
Said Sud of his experience, “I was motivated to take on the Shelter Network/InnVision nonprofitmerger because it represented a unique opportunity to use my M&A skill set in a completely different context. The transaction was challenging in that it questioned some of the most basic assumptions about the type of M&A work that forms the bulk of my practice – namely, the fact that there was no actual consideration changing hands in this transaction required us to be creative and take a problem-solving approach to transaction issues as they arose. Moreover, we were forced to engage with an unfamiliar regulatory framework with little precedent. Working on the transaction and my subsequent corporate work for the combined entity has been extremely fulfilling on a personal and professional level, as it has afforded me the ability to help, in a small way, with the admirable mission of combatting homelessness in the Bay Area. I have found that my pro bono clients are extraordinarily grateful for the guidance and similarly I have been extraordinarily grateful for the unique opportunity to share my experience with an organization that is working to create a solution to a truly pressing problem in our community.”
Tax associate Larissa Neumann’s nonprofit work is also pointed to as exemplary in the The National Law Journal profile. In 2013, she provided legal counsel to a wide array of organizations, including but not limited to San Francisco Mayor’s Committee for Employment of Persons with Disabilities; Rock Health; ChIPS (which supports and promotes women in intellectual property); Earth, Air and Space Educational Foundation; Recovery Café San Jose; Animal Legal Defense Fund; Kiva; Women in Health; and Ribbon of Hope.
“It is a pleasure to see that Fenwick has been recognized by the National Law Journal’s Pro Bono Hot List for the many ways our firm enriches and supports the Silicon Valley community,” said Neumann. “Fenwick has always been fully supportive of my pro bono efforts, allowing me to use my legal expertise to help non-profit organizations advance their charitable missions through the benefits of tax exempt status. Hearing the sincere expressions of gratitude from my pro bono clients has always been the most rewarding part of my pro bono work. I am truly grateful that Fenwick’s Pro Bono program has given me the opportunity to give back to my community in a meaningful and inspiring way.”
Evan, a graduate of Santa Clara University School of Law, is an associate in the Corporate practice group at Fenwick & West LLP. He focuses on start-up counseling, venture capital financings, mergers and acquisitions and other strategic transactions, including cross-border transactions, representing companies ranging from startups to large publicly-held companies in the networking, software, life sciences, gaming, internet, social media and semiconductor industries. Evan received the firm’s Pro Bono Client Services Award for 2011, awarded for his work with Cisco on the Citizens Schools Apprenticeship Program, which brings relevant learning experiences to middle-school students in lower-income neighborhoods.
On October 26, 2013, Fenwick & West LLP received the Advancement in Animal Law Pro Bono Achievement Award from the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF). This award recognized the firm’s dedication, expertise, and commitment of pro bono hours toward assisting ALDF achieve its mission to protect the lives and advance the interests of animals through the legal system.
Fenwick attorneys from several practice groups and disciplines contributed their time and skill to ALDF projects throughout 2013. Tax Associate William R. Skinner investigated and provided legal advice pertaining to the ALDF’s suit against a California restaurant that serves foie gras in convention of California Health and Safety Code § § 25981-82, which bans the production and sale of foie gras within the state. Fenwick Litigation Associates Elizabeth B. Hagan, Ph. D. and Zach J. Miller contributed their time to assist with ALDF’s petition for changes to federal regulations under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) relating to the confinement of orcas, dolphins and other marine mammals. Ms. Hagan and Mr. Miller provided both legal analysis and summarized the significant changes in scientific findings related to these species since the federal regulations were last updated in 1979. Finally, Technology and eDiscovery Counsel Robert D. Brownstone and Director of Information Technology Kevin K. Moore are engaged in a long-term project with the ALDF, assisting the organization’s General Counsel with formulating a robust yet agile records retention policy.
For more than three decades, the Animal Legal Defense Fund has been fighting to protect the lives of animals. Founded in 1979 by attorneys active in shaping the emerging field of animal law, ALDF has blazed the trail for stronger enforcement of anti-cruelty laws and more humane treatment of animals in every corner of American life.
At Fenwick & West, we are proud of our commitment to the community and to our culture of making a difference in the lives of individuals and organizations in the communities where we live and work. We recognize that providing legal services is not only an essential part of our professional responsibility, but also an excellent opportunity for our attorneys to gain valuable practical experience, learn new areas of the law and contribute to the community.
Follow via RSS
