Overview We represented New York City and several health care providers and associations in their challenge to the constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act. The Supreme Court held that the Act violated the Presentment Clause of the Constitution. Mr. Cooper argued the case in the Supreme Court.

Overview We represent shareholders of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in a challenge to the U.S. Government’s nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. After the en banc Fifth Circuit agreed with our arguments that the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) exceeded its statutory authority and was unconstitutionally structured, the Supreme Court reviewed the case. The Supreme Court affirmed the Fifth Circuit's ruling that FHFA's structure violates the separation of powers and remanded the case for further proceedings on the appropriate remedy. Mr. Thompson presented argument for the shareholders in both the Fifth Circuit and the Supreme Court.

Overview We represented the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund in an action brought by the FEC alleging violation of campaign contribution regulations. The court of appeals agreed with our position that the composition of the FEC violated the separation of powers. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the appeal after argument, agreeing with our argument that the FEC did not have independent litigating authority to challenge the decision of the court of appeals. The case was argued before the Supreme Court by Mr. Cooper.

Overview We represented several members of Congress in their challenge to the constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act. Although the district court held that the Act was unconstitutional, the Supreme Court declined to reach the merits of the members’ claim, holding that they did not have standing to bring this challenge.