Statement by William A. Brewer III, Partner at Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, on Supreme Court Hearing Regarding President Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order
May 15, 2025 — The U.S. Supreme Court hearing today represented a pivotal moment, not for immigration law but also for the broader issue of judicial power and its proper scope. As counsel deeply involved in constitutional and immigration matters, we closely followed the arguments presented.
On the ultimate efficacy of President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14160, the justices appeared skeptical over the order, which seeks to deny citizenship to children born on U.S. soil to undocumented immigrants or temporary visa holders. The longstanding precedent set by the Supreme Court’s 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark appeared front of mind for several justices, highlighting significant constitutional concerns with the executive order.
However, it was Justice Sonia Sotomayor's commentary regarding the challenges of eliminating nationwide injunctions that underscored the importance of today’s argument. She noted that the removal of such remedies could inundate courts with countless individual lawsuits. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson further emphasized the risks inherent in reducing nationwide injunctions, potentially undermining the consistency and reliability essential to our legal system.
Conversely, other justices expressed concerns about judicial overreach, specifically through nationwide injunctions issued by federal district courts. Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested class-action lawsuits as preferable alternatives, emphasizing procedural rigor and judicial precision.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised pointed questions regarding the Trump administration’s inconsistent positions on nationwide injunctions versus class-action litigation, highlighting the nuanced challenges in balancing judicial remedies.
The Court’s upcoming decision, expected by late June or early July, carries profound implications. While Trump's executive order seems likely to be invalidated, the broader question of limiting nationwide injunctions may significantly impact future judicial strategies for challenging federal policies.
We at Brewer, through our Storefront affiliate, remain committed to safeguarding constitutional principles, advocating for consistent application of the law, and closely monitoring developments that could reshape judicial authority and executive accountability.
William Brewer Writes About Embracing AI, Alternative Billing Models
April 3, 2025 — In a recently published Law360 article, William A. Brewer III argues the billable hour isn't just outdated – it's a liability threatening firms clinging to antiquated billing models.
In "Firms Must Embrace Alternative Billing Methods or Fall Behind," Brewer highlights the risk for firms reliant on antiquated billing models in a legal market reshaped by AI, enhanced competition, and growing demand for outcome-based fee arrangements. Brewer states, “Law firms face a choice: evolve or fade into irrelevance. To stay competitive, they must ditch the billable hour, embrace AI, and accelerate their digital transformation – before it’s too late.”
Brewer predicts that firms willing to adopt outcome-based fee arrangements will gain a decisive edge. Clients, he notes, are demanding results and will become increasingly unwilling to bankroll unproductive hours. Frustrated, they will seek alternatives.
“As more companies seek legal services that prioritize outcomes over hours, the firms that embrace this new paradigm will gain a decisive competitive advantage. Those who resist will lose ground to tech-savvy boutiques, Big Four firms and legal startups that aren't shackled by tradition.”
Brewer then addresses Big Law directly, stating, “Big Law must evolve now to stay ahead. The firms that embrace AI, ditch the billable hour and redefine their value proposition will thrive. This is the dawn of a golden age. Technology holds the promise of less drudgery, expanded access to justice, and firms empowered to deliver sharper, faster and more strategic legal services. Change isn't coming — it's here. And the firms that are embracing it won't just survive. They'll set the standard for the future.”
Pressure is a Privilege: A Look Back at 2024
December 31, 2024 — Built with the conviction that “pressure is a privilege,” Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors faced significant challenges in 2024 and delivered outstanding results in courtrooms, boardrooms, and the communities we proudly serve.
Achievements for Our Clients: This year, we successfully concluded our multi-year defense of a major client against multiple attempts by the New York Attorney General to "eliminate" that client. For that same client we achieved a unanimous 9-0 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, which vacated a ruling by the Second Circuit that dismissed First Amendment claims against a public official who conspired with others to financially destroy our client. And - along the way - our high-stakes advocacy nationwide also resulted in over $200 million in awards and settlements for our other commercial clients.
Contributions to Our Community: The Brewer Storefront, our community impact legal affiliate, achieved significant victories. We successfully represented a senior citizen who was the victim of an elaborate financial scam. We pursued several cases to protect voting rights against school board voting schemes that diluted the votes of citizens of color throughout Texas, and we initiated a comprehensive statewide effort to ensure that Texas school boards operate in compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
Strengthening Partnerships: Showcasing the continued strength of the Brewer Foundation’s partnership with New York University, the International Public Policy Forum (IPPF) began its 24th year of inviting high school students around the world to engage in written and oral debates on public policy issues. The 2025 competition is ongoing and involves more than 300 high schools and thousands of students globally.
Fostering the Next Generation: In 2024, the Brewer Foundation’s Future Leaders Program provided essential leadership and academic development to more than 200 students from the Dallas Independent School District. The Future Leaders Program equips the next generation with the tools to flourish in an everchanging world.
A Commitment to the Challenges of Tomorrow: Emerging technologies and innovative tools will empower our professionals to achieve even greater levels of efficiency as we continue to deliver superior outcomes for our clients. In line with our commitment to remaining at the forefront of these advancements, we are excited to announce the launch of many new projects including a brand-new podcast, The Art of Advocacy, hosted by Bill Brewer, that will explore issues at the intersection of law, business, and communications.
We take pride in what we achieved in 2024, and your unwavering support propels us toward even greater results. As we move forward, we remain steadfast in our commitment to continuously push the boundaries of excellence in our advocacy. We embrace every obstacle, every challenge, and every fight, all while appreciating that pressure is a privilege.
Dallas Morning News Publishes Brewer Storefront Op-Ed on Election Timing
August 31, 2023 — The Dallas Morning News published an op-ed in the Opinion section Thursday by partner William A. Brewer III and Marie Brewer calling for the elimination of off-cycle May local elections in Texas and moving elections on-cycle to November to improve voter participation. The article reflects the Brewer Storefront’s continued dedication to enforcing and promoting the Voting Rights Act in Texas communities. The Storefront is the firm’s community-service legal affiliate.
The commentary follows:
In Texas, discriminatory voting practices that depress minority voter participation remain the norm. The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Allen vs. Milligan, upholding Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, could spark legal challenges to our state’s local and state election systems going forward.
In our state, the Election Code mandates that general and special elections be held on one of the uniform election dates: the first Saturday in May, or the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Although the code allows for elections to be held “on-cycle” (when state and federal elections occur), many local school board and city council elections are still held in May rather than November.
The timing of elections significantly impacts voter turnout. Experts, like political scientist Sarah F. Anzia, argue that the date of an election is the single greatest factor impacting voter turnout and composition. Other states recognize this and have adjusted their local elections accordingly. New York recently joined California, Arizona and Nevada in moving off-cycle local elections to coincide with statewide and national elections. These states point to increasing voter turnout and opportunity, specifically minority turnout, as the reason for the shift.
Fewer than 25% of Americans vote in elections for their local mayor and city council members, and turnout in off-cycle local elections averages over 30% lower than local elections held during presidential elections. In Texas, the situation is even more alarming. This past May, several major counties could not even reach 10% voter turnout.
All voting systems should aim to increase voter participation, and off-cycle elections especially warrant particular attention due to their disproportionate impact on minority voters. When off-cycle elections are moved on-cycle, minority groups increase their share of the electorate by up to 10 percentage points. Moreover, when local elections coincide with presidential elections, a larger share of voters come from families earning under $30,000 annually, while the share of voters earning more than $100,000 decreases.
When local elections are synchronized with national or statewide elections, the election date garners greater attention and accessibility across all voter groups. Conversely, off-cycle elections result in lower participation by large portions of eligible voters, and minority groups are disproportionately affected.
The past decade of social science research establishes that off-cycle elections undeniably affect voter participation and the makeup of voters who turn up at the ballot box, producing a voter pool that is not representative of the entire community.
As the courts have recognized, factors such as homeownership, education and income are strongly associated with voter turnout. Racial disparities in those factors can therefore contribute to racial disparities in political participation as well.
Although there may have been legitimate concerns in the 1800s and early 1900s that prompted off-cycle elections, such as the desire to separate local races from corrupt and partisan elections held at the federal and state level, there were also more problematic reasons aimed at discouraging voter participation from certain demographics.
Many local Texas communities, with a long history of racial discrimination, still experience disparities in wealth, education and homeownership. It is evident that under the totality of circumstances, off-cycle elections violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. This was not a direct argument in Allen vs. Mulligan, but the case is instructive on many levels: It fosters the belief that voting rights should be protected and any barriers to equal opportunity should be eliminated. And with such a viable alternative of switching to on-cycle elections, there is no reason for this practice to persist where minority groups already struggle to make their voices heard.
Our institutions work best when they are welcoming and inclusive. Texas should embrace the learnings of the recent Supreme Court decision — and awaken to the many ways in which the Voting Rights Act can be used to foster political opportunity.
Brewer Partner Cecelia Fanelli Comments on Controversial LA Ordinance
August 11, 2022 – Law360 interviewed Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors Partner Cecelia Fanelli about the implications of a proposed Los Angeles ordinance that would require hotels to house homeless people in vacant rooms. The Los Angeles City Council recently voted to put the proposed ordinance on the ballot, leaving it up to voters to decide whether to approve the measure.
Fanelli said the proposed ordinance raises many concerns, including placing hospitality workers outside of their traditional role, charging them to provide “nightly social services” for homeless people in hotel rooms.
"The ordinance also raises the issue of an overreach into the affairs of private businesses by the government, and it also potentially places into jeopardy the insurance coverage of hotels and motels given the change in their risk profile. Those costs would likely be passed on to consumers," Fanelli said.
"If it begins in Los Angeles, there's nothing to say that similar initiatives wouldn't be instituted in other cities," she added.
To read more, click here.
Brewer Anti-SLAPP Expert Analysis Article Published by Law360
On January 12, 2022, Law360 published an expert analysis piece written by Brewer Partner William Brewer and Associate Will Brewer titled, “Ruling Confirms Causation is Key Under NY Anti-SLAPP Law.”
The article states, “Threats of litigation initiated for the purpose of censoring, intimidating, or punishing a person for exercising their First Amendment rights have prompted many jurisdictions to pass laws targeting strategic litigation against public participation, otherwise known as anti-SLAPP statutes.”
The article discusses how the Hon. Nancy Bannon of the New York Supreme Court recently considered and dismissed an anti-SLAPP counterclaim in a dispute between Howard M. Meyers and and LEG Q LLC (“LEG Q”) in RSR Corp. et al. v. LEG Q LLC et al., Index No. 650342/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.).
The authors write, “If this ruling is any indication of how New York courts will interpret the anti-SLAPP claim in the future, counsel should take note that, at the motion to dismiss stage, an anti-SLAPP claim need not have in hand any judicial finding regarding the nature of a purportedly SLAPP lawsuit; allegations will suffice.”
The authors add, “Moreover, in light of this decision, the breadth of what constitutes a communication in connection with the ‘public interest’—reaching matters that are not purely private as between the parties—cannot be overstated.”
To read more, click here.
Managing Partner William Brewer Writes About the Value of Debate
Managing Partner William Brewer recently wrote a commentary on LinkedIn about the International Public Policy Forum (IPPF) competition, which he founded in 2001. The IPPF is the only high school debate competition that gives students from around the world the opportunity to engage in written and oral debates on issues of public policy.