Constitutional Law and Civil Rights
Derecho Constitucional y Derechos Civiles
Civil Rights Litigation and Defense
Litigation plays a pivotal role in safeguarding civil rights in the United States. It serves as a vital mechanism for challenging injustices, addressing systemic discrimination, and upholding the principles enshrined in the Constitution. While we hope that our institutions will always act within the boundaries set by the Constitution, history has shown that this is not always true.
That’s where we come in.
DLG has a well-earned reputation as an aggressive and effective advocate for our clients in courts across the country, from local state courts to the Supreme Court of the United States. We are deeply committed to the preservation of fundamental rights through legal advocacy. We don’t shy away from the hot button topics of the day, and advocate for and work with organizations that span the political spectrum. We believe that a healthy democracy is one that can wrestle with the most difficult questions in the open.
Case Study:
Health Freedom Def. Fund
v.
Biden et al.
Davillier Law Group provided comprehensive representation for a national health freedom organization seeking judicial clarity on the limits of governmental power to impose public health restrictions during a pandemic. We argued in multiple nationwide cases at the state and federal level regarding vaccination and mask mandates. In HFDF v. Biden, the court struck down the CDC’s national mask mandate, finding that while there was an indisputable public interest in combating the spread of Covid-19, the CDC had exceeded its statutory authority, did not properly allow for public notice and comment, and failed to adequately explain its decision as required by the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), sometimes referred to as the “constitution of U.S. administrative law”. Even and especially in extraordinary circumstances, federal agencies are accountable to the public and must make their rules through a reasoned and transparent process.
Text of the Court Order
TSA Press Release
News Coverage of the Decision
A man dies when he refuses to stand up for that which is right.
A man dies when he refuses to stand up for justice.
A man dies when he refuses to take a stand for that which is true.
— Dr Martin Luther King Jr
Amicus Curiae Briefs and the US Supreme Court
DLG attorneys are often called to develop the constitutional arguments necessary to defend the people against the continuous overreach of the federal government.
The systematic encroachment hit a high mark during the Covid lockdowns. We were fighting on behalf of our clients before the criticism of the federal overreach became mainstream. Most notably in our fight against the travel mask mandate.
Most recently our roadmap and argument against the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith was adopted by Justice Thomas’ concurrence in the Trump immunity case and then again followed by judge Cannon in the Southern District of Florida in the classified documents case.
The arguments in our amicus briefs have been incorporated into opinions by Supreme Court Justices and influenced other cases from subordinate courts.
Case Study:
United States of America
vs. Donald J. Trump
Davillier Law Group submitted an amicus curiae brief to the court in support of neither party. Our argument was simple: the office of Special Counsel held by Jack Smith is unlawful because it was not authorized by Congress as is required by the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, all relevant statues having long since expired. This argument was favorably referenced by Justice Clarence Thomas in a concurring opinion, and later by Judge Eileen Cannon in her dismissal of the Trump classified documents case.
DLG’s Amicus Curiae Brief
Justice Clarence Thomas’ Concurrence
Eileen Cannons’ Order of Dismissal
WSJ: The Smearing of Eileen Cannon