Harvard University has assembled a formidable team of conservative legal heavyweights to take on a lawsuit against the Trump administration. The team includes a former Texas solicitor general who has argued in favor of abortion restrictions, two former clerks to Justice Clarence Thomas, and a one-time adviser to the Trump Organization.
This high-profile legal battle marks a significant departure from Harvard’s previous legal challenges, such as defending affirmative action in 2022 with the help of the firm WilmerHale. However, the Trump administration’s policies have forced Harvard to rethink its legal strategy and bring in a powerhouse team of Republican-aligned lawyers.
The stakes are high for Harvard, with billions of dollars in federal funds on the line if they lose the case. Legal experts believe that Harvard has a strong case on the legal merits, but the composition of their legal team is strategically designed to appeal to a Supreme Court dominated by Republican-appointed justices.
The decision to hire conservative lawyers is not unprecedented. Former University of Michigan president Lee C. Bollinger employed a similar strategy in a 2003 affirmative action case before the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled in Michigan’s favor.
Harvard’s case against the Trump administration focuses on violations of the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act. The university argues that the government failed to follow its own rules in imposing penalties and cutting federal funds.
The team of lawyers representing Harvard includes a mix of conservative and non-conservative legal experts. While some have backgrounds in conservative causes, others like Joshua S. Levy, a former U.S. attorney in Boston, have more diverse legal experiences.
The lead attorney for Harvard, William A. Burck, brings a wealth of legal expertise, having clerked for Justice Anthony M. Kennedy and served as a deputy to Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. Despite some risks associated with taking on Harvard as a client, Burck and his team are committed to defending the university’s case.
Harvard’s legal strategy has been successful in the past, but it also carries risks. As Mr. Bollinger cautioned, it’s essential to tread carefully and ensure that the legal team’s composition does not come across as manipulative to the judges hearing the case.
