<![CDATA[Erin Murphy]]>

Fresh off a 2A win at SCOTUS, Paul Clement has a new client: the firearms industry

July 7, 2022 by Cam Edwards Leave a Comment

You might recall that just hours after attorneys Paul Clement and Erin Murphy heard the good news that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of their clients in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen the high-end law firm that employed them as partners gave them an edict: drop your gun-related clients or find another place to work.

Clement and Murphy parted ways with Kirkland and Ellis that same day and have started their own firm. Now the pair have added a big client to their roster, and are taking on a law that the firearms industry calls an “existential threat” to its existence. The National Shooting Sports Foundation announced that Clement & Murphy, PLLC, will be representing them in its appeal to the Second Circuit in its lawsuit challenging New York’s public nuisance statute, which was modified by Democrats in Albany to allow lawsuits against gun makers, distributers, and retailers for the criminal misuse of firearms that take place in New York, even when the sale occurred in another state, if all applicable laws were followed in the sale of the gun, or if the gun that was used was stolen.

Rather than abandon their clients in the midst of ongoing representations, Clement and Murphy continue to stand by their principles and defend their clients’ fundamental Constitutional rights. They wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “The American legal profession’s willingness to take on and stand by controversial clients has made our system of justice the envy of the world. The profession shouldn’t back down from its willingness to tackle the most divisive issues. We certainly won’t.”
“NSSF is proud to be represented by such accomplished and skilled appellate lawyers who clearly demonstrate the depth of character so badly needed in today’s legal system,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “Both Clement and Murphy demonstrated bold and decisive resolve to stand with their clients instead of abandoning them at the behest of their previous firm. They have a sterling professional legal reputation that is solidly matched with their fidelity to their clients. NSSF and our industry co-plaintiffs are in the very capable hands of the nation’s premier appellate law firm of Clement & Murphy, PLLC.”

This is a big get for a critically important case for the firearms industry. Other states like New Jersey are already starting to follow New York’s lead by passing similar legislation of their own, while the New York law was recently used by a victim of the New York subway shooting to sue Glock, even though the handgun was legally purchased in Ohio more than a decade before the shooting took place.

Gun control activists want to use these lawsuits to do what they can’t do legislatively: shut down the firearms industry and make it nearly impossible to purchase a gun in order to exercise your Second Amendment rights. Last month a U.S. District Judge in New York dismissed the lawsuit filed by NSSF and multiple companies within the firearms industry challenging the New York statute, setting up the appeal in the Second Circuit. I’m looking forward to seeing what Clement and Murphy can do with this case, and I’m really glad to see that the pair aren’t backing away from taking on crucial cases like this one. I can’t imagine that New York AG Letitia James is looking forward to squaring off with the team that just defeated the state’s “may issue” laws at the highest court in the land, and hopefully we won’t have too long to wait to see Clement and Murphy’s first legal salvo directed at New York’s public nuisance law.

Bruen attorneys leave law firm after being told to ditch 2A clients

June 24, 2022 by Cam Edwards Leave a Comment

Yesterday should have been a triumphant day for Paul Clement and Erin Murphy. The pair won a landmark victory at the Supreme Court when justices ruled 6-3 in favor of their clients in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, striking down the state’s unconstitutional “may issue” carry laws. But yesterday the pair also learned that the other partners at Kirkland and Ellis, the law firm where both work, apparently weren’t too happy about the win and told the two attorneys they had a choice to make: ditch their Second Amendment-related clients or leave the firm.

So, as of yesterday, Clement and Murphy are free agents.

This isn’t the first time we have left a firm to stick by a client. What makes this circumstance different is that the firm approved our representation of these clients years ago, and dropping them would cost the clients years of institutional memory. More remarkable still, in one of the cases we were asked to drop, we prevailed in the Supreme Court on Thursday. Those who object to the representation are thus taking issue with the Constitution as interpreted by a majority of the high court.
The Constitution is the foundation of American liberty, but it isn’t self-executing. It depends on lawyers who are willing to take on controversial matters and on judges who are able to hear the best possible arguments from both sides. The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction is limited to cases and controversies, which means the justices can’t uphold rights without an advocate to make the argument.
The American legal profession’s willingness to take on and stand by controversial clients has made our system of justice the envy of the world. The profession shouldn’t back down from its willingness to tackle the most divisive issues. We certainly won’t.
Our decision, then, has little to do with the issues in this case and everything to do with the underlying principle. We would make the same choice for any of our clients. The scope of the Second Amendment and the plague of gun violence are more controversial than the Federal Arbitration Act or even religious speech. But that makes resisting the pressure to drop an unpopular client all the more crucial. The problems posed by the spate of recent violent gun crimes are real. But the solution isn’t to fire clients who have just vindicated a fundamental constitutional right. We are sticking with our clients.

I’ve had the opportunity to interview Clement a few times over the years as well as read a number of his briefs in 2A cases (including Bruen) and I’ve always been impressed with his legal acumen. I’m equally impressed by the conviction on display here on the part of both attorneys. It would have been easy to walk away from Second Amendment litigation and to abide by the wishes of the law firm where they work, especially in a town so hostile to the right to keep and bear arms as Washington, D.C. Clement and Murphy would have probably elevated their social standing by doing so, but instead they chose to stand by their clients and their desire to seek justice before the highest court in the land.

Clement and Murphy were not only the lead attorneys in the Bruen case, they’re also involved in two other cases that are pending in conference at the Court. Clement is the counsel of record in two separate magazine ban cases, one from California and the other out of New Jersey. It’s anticipated that the Court will act on those cases when orders are released next Monday, though whether or not they accept either case or remand them back down to the appellate courts with instructions to follow the “text and history” test laid out by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Bruen opinion remains to be seen. Either way, these cases are still very much live issues, and I’m glad to know that the plaintiffs will continue to be represented by the pair (and a host of other great attorneys as well).

The decision by Kirkland and Ellis to make Clement and Murphy choose between representing 2A clients or continuing to work at the firm does demonstrate a big problem for 2A activists, however. Major gun control groups like Everytown and Giffords not only have their own in-house litigation teams, they regularly receive the help of white-shoe firms offering their services free of charge. Second Amendment organizations, meanwhile, have to worry about the attorneys they hired possibly getting canned from their place of employment thanks to partners’ anti-gun attitudes or willingness to bend a knee to the woke mob.

We have the better argument, and we’ve got some great attorneys, but Clement and Murphy’s tale is a grim reminder that the gun control lobby is trying to do everything they can to turn any and every supporter of the right to keep and bear arms into social and professional pariahs. The fight for our Second Amendment rights is also a defense of our First Amendment freedoms of expression and association, and that won’t change no matter how many great decisions are handed down by the Supreme Court.