Pro Bono

Farella Braun + Martel and Yale Law School’s Peter Gruber Rule of Law Clinic filed two amicus briefs on behalf of a group of former senior U.S. national security officials in support of artificial intelligence company Anthropic’s challenges to its designation as a supply chain risk by the U.S. Department of War. Learn more here.  

This class action lawsuit was filed in federal court in San Francisco in June 2025 on behalf of University of California researchers whose grants were abruptly terminated without any individualized consideration or process, pursuant to President Trump’s Executive Orders.  The lawsuit asserts that the government’s grant terminations violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the class members’ constitutional rights, including their First Amendment right to free speech and Fifth Amendment right to due process.

On June 23, U.S. District Court (Northern District of California) Judge Rita F. Lin issued a class-wide preliminary injunction, ordering the government to cease grant terminations under President Trump’s and the agencies’ unlawful directives, and to reinstate previously-terminated research grants from the EPA, NSF, and NEH across the UC system.

On August 21, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the federal government’s motion to stay Judge Lin’s preliminary injunction order. By its ruling, the appellate panel kept in force the district court’s preliminary injunction, ensuring that grant funding will continue to flow while the government’s appeal of the injunction continues. 

On September 22, the District Court issued a second injunction, ordering the government to cease grant terminations by DOD, DOT, and NIH, and to reinstate grants previously terminated by those agencies.  

On November 24,  plaintiffs filed (1) motion for leave to file third amended complaint, adding class plaintiffs with affected DOE grants, and (2) motion for preliminary injunction seeking reinstatement of these grants, similar to the prior injunctions granted against EPA, NSF, NEH, DOD, DOT, and NIH.

On December 23, the Ninth Circuit issued an Amended Order, reversing a limited part of what it decided in August 2025 in upholding the District Court’s determination that the Trump administration violated the law in terminating grants to UC researchers. The Ninth Circuit again found that the Trump administration violated the First Amendment in cutting off grants based on the perceived viewpoints of the research. The District Court’s order reinstating these grants to members of the Equity Termination Class remains in effect.

The Ninth Circuit, however, determined that another set of claims under the federal Administrative Procedure Act likely must go to the Court of Federal Claims rather than the federal district court. The Ninth Circuit thus stayed the District Court’s order reinstating grants to the Form Termination Class. At this point, this applies only to grants from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Endowment of the Humanities that are not also covered by the Equity Termination Class.

On December 29, plaintiffs sought reconsideration of the Ninth Circuit panel’s conclusion that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the claims under the Administrative Procedure Act.

On January 30, the District Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint and denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Provisional Class Certification as to the Department of Energy. For Plaintiff’s Preliminary Injunction Motion, the District Court stated that there is not enough information in the record to support a finding that the terminations likely violated the Equal Protection Clause. The District Court concurrently issued an order setting a case schedule to proceed directly to cross-motions for summary judgment on the equal production claim after production of the administrative record and discovery.

On February 3, plaintiffs filed their Third Amended Complaint.

On February 23, the Ninth Circuit denied Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration or reconsideration en banc.

Copies of the complaint, key court orders, and legal briefs in the litigation may be accessed here.

Farella filed an amicus brief on behalf of 253 members of Congress in two parallel appeals in the D.C. Circuit in cases. Both cases involve the government’s appeals from federal district court decisions that invalidated the executive branch’s unlawful firings of members of the boards of two independent federal agencies, the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the over thirty other multimember independent agencies created by Congress.  

A Farella team filed an amicus brief in support of pending litigation (AFSA v. Trump) in federal district court in Washington D.C. on behalf of an illustrious group of former senior national security officials, including former Secretaries of Defense Chuck Hagel and William Perry and former CIA Director Michael Hayden. The brief persuasively conveys the enormous national security risks involved in the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development, more commonly known as USAID. Read the brief here.

The American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Southern California, and Farella Braun + Martel filed a lawsuit against several federal agencies to obtain records revealing the policies and standards at federal prisons and temporary soft-sided facilities used by immigration authorities to detain people who are immigrants. The lawsuit comes weeks after the agencies – which include the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) – failed to respond to two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests submitted by ACLU SoCal in September 2024. The litigation is the ACLU’s latest effort to prepare for potential anti-immigrant actions in future presidential administrations. Learn more here.

New documents obtained in June 2025 by the ACLU affirm widespread media reports of unsafe and inhumane conditions at tent facilities used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to detain people arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border during President Trump’s first term. Learn more here.

Farella Braun + Martel and the Housing Action Coalition (HAC) filed a lawsuit against the City of San Mateo, challenging its recently adopted Housing Element in order to make the city comply with state housing laws. The lawsuit is the first in the Bay Area to challenge a Housing Element that has been certified by the State, by invoking a law requiring cities to back up their claims that housing sites are realistically available with substantial evidence. The lawsuit explains that the City of San Mateo claimed to meet its fair share of the 2023-2031 regional need for housing – a number known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) – by listing a number of sites where the city knew development was not likely. Learn more here.

Won a grant of asylum for a Maya K’iche’ woman from Guatemala who was subjected to various forms of persecution, discrimination, and trauma throughout her childhood and into her adulthood. She fled Guatemala in 2019 and presented herself to U.S. immigration officials, declaring an intent to seek protection in the U.S. At an August 2023 merits hearing, the immigration judge found her testimony to be credible and granted her asylum application on multiple alternative grounds. The government has waived its right to appeal.

Provided legal assistance to Access Now and a coalition of civil society organizations to draft and file an amicus curiae brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal’s consideration of NSO Group Technologies Ltd. v. WhatsApp Inc. The NSO case originated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California after WhatsApp alleged that NSO infiltrated its servers to inject its Pegasus spyware technology onto the phones of WhatsApp’s users, including dissidents, journalists, and human rights activists working abroad. The question on appeal was whether NSO was entitled to immunity as an agent working on behalf of sovereign governments, and Access Now’s amicus brief argued that it should not. In November 2021, the 9th Circuit released its decision agreeing with WhatsApp and Access Now’s position and declining to afford NSO that immunity. You can read Access Now’s amicus curiae brief here.

NSO filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court in the hopes that the Court would review and overturn the 9th Circuit’s decision. Rather than ruling on NSO’s petition, the Court requested the opinion of the Solicitor General’s Office as a means of obtaining the United States government’s view. In August 2022, we assisted Access Now in submitting a letter to the Solicitor General’s office urging it recommend that the Court deny NSO’s petition, and in November 2022, the Solicitor General did just that.

After reviewing the briefs, including the Solicitor General’s brief, the Supreme Court issued an order on January 9, 2023 denying NSO’s petition for certiorari, sending the case back to where it originated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. In a precedent-setting ruling on December 20, 2024, the federal court found NSO Group liable for spyware hacks targeting 1,400 WhatsApp user devices.

Farella joined the Legal Alliance for Reproductive Rights with the Bar Association of San Francisco to provide pro bono legal services to those who will be personally impacted by the overturning of Roe v. Wade. We are ready, willing, and able to provide those services where they are needed. After the decision, the firm contributed to the National Network of Abortion Funds and Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Learn more here.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) released its final rule on December 14, 2022 completely rescinding the agency's harmful 2020 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) rule that unlawfully gutted anti-redlining rules. The OCC will revert to prior regulations while it continues an interagency process to draft new CRA rules with the Federal Reserve Board and FDIC. Farella and Democracy Forward represented the National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC) and the California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC) in the lawsuit filed on June 25, 2020 against the OCC for unlawfully eviscerating the vital anti-redlining rules put in place under the CRA. The CRA was enacted to address redlining and secure access for communities of color and low- and moderate-income communities to financial services that have long enabled affluent, white communities to build wealth. Read a statement by the NCRA commending the repeal of the CRA rule changes and announcing the dismissal of the lawsuit here.

Farella filed an amicus brief on behalf of Americans Against Gun Violence in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al., v. Kevin P. Bruen, et al. appeal pending before the United States Supreme Court. In this lawsuit, the petitioners have sought to strike down a longstanding New York law that requires individuals seeking to obtain an unrestricted license to carry concealed handguns in public to demonstrate proper cause. After the Northern District of New York dismissed the case and the Second Circuit affirmed, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on the following question: “Whether the State’s denial of petitioners’ application for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.” Learn more here.

Farella served as the pro bono legal partner to La Cocina in the development of La Cocina Municipal Marketplace in San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood. The nation’s first women-led food hall will be home to seven women-of-color chefs. The 7,000-square-foot food hall at 101 Hyde Street opens on April 5, 2021. La Cocina is a 501(c)3 nonprofit food business incubator that works to solve problems of equity in business ownership; inclusivity in the mainstream American marketplace; barriers to entry for women, people of color, and immigrant business owners; and the too-high cost of entry for the food industry generally. ​

As co-counsel with Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Farella successfully defended the City of Morgan Hill in a lawsuit challenging its local ordinance requiring the reporting of lost or stolen firearms brought by NRA’s California state affiliate, the California Rifle & Pistol Association.

Farella has won another significant victory for Marvin Pete Walker Jr., one of the longest-serving inmates on California’s death row, with the Ninth Circuit ruling on July 31, 2020 that the prosecutor had engaged in unconstitutional racial discrimination by striking all three Black jurors, and then giving demonstrably false reasons for why he did it. Read more here.

With the help of Farella Braun + Martel Partner Don Sobelman, South Valley Islamic Center (SVIC) won approval for its 16-acre Cordoba Center Project in San Martin, California. Learn more here.

Farella lawyers teamed up with in-house lawyers from Oracle and Dropbox and Centro Legal de la Raza to help victims of violent crime who assist law enforcement apply for “U-Nonimmigrant Status” visas. U-visas incentivize cooperation with law enforcement for people who don’t have a valid visa (and therefore might otherwise avoid reporting a crime). Many of the clients we worked with had waited years to file their applications because they didn’t have money to pay legal fees.

In Leonard Fyock, et al v. City of Sunnyvale, et al., No. 13-cv-05807 RMW (N.D. Cal.), Farella attorneys successfully defended the City of Sunnyvale’s ban on possession of large capacity magazines against a Second Amendment attack by the National Rifle Association. After full briefing and argument, Judge Whyte denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in March 2014. The plaintiffs appealed the ruling and filed emergency motions, first with the Ninth Circuit and later the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to stop the ordinance from taking effect pending the resolution of the appeal. The Farella team opposed both emergency motions on behalf of Sunnyvale, and both motions were denied. The Ninth Circuit Court heard oral argument from Farella and a specialist hired by the NRA on Nov. 17, 2014. On March 4, 2015 it affirmed the district court’s denial of the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.

Farella filed an amicus brief on behalf of a coalition of advocacy groups opposing Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that bans same-sex marriage. Farella's amicus brief focuses on the negative and stigmatic impact the measure has on the current and future children of same-sex parents. The groups represented by Farella on the brief include: The Children's Law Center of Los Angeles, Family Equality Council; Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Therapists Association; the Human Rights Campaign; The Human Rights Campaign Foundation; Kids in Common; Legal Services for Children; the National Black Justice Coalition; National Center for Youth Law; the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Foundation; PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbian and Gays Inc.) and the San Francisco Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA).