Hello, Professor Wang! Welcome to UVA and thanks for sitting down with the Law Weekly. Although, as I understand it, you went to UVA for undergrad, so this is really more of a welcome back.
Yes, I did go to UVA for undergrad and had a great time here in Charlottesville. In fact, I lived on the Lawn, right near the Rotunda.
As most of us know, you have returned to lead the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic. But you also worked in private practice in Washington D.C. for a few years after law school. How did you make the transition from private practice to academia?
I did both trial and appellate work, but I was eager to get more experience as first chair in appellate matters, so over time I sought out more pro bono appellate work. Once I had a few successes, clients would reach out to me, and courts appointed me more regularly without me having to seek out those opportunities as actively. It became clear to me that this was the kind of work I was really interested in devoting myself to long-term, and so I started looking for clinic positions and joined Northwestern to do just that.
You mention that once you had some success in your pro bono work, more of those assignments began to flow your way. Is there any case in particular that you think of as a turning point in that respect?
Yes, there was a case in the Sixth Circuit called United States v. Lee,[1] where I represented a client who was challenging the sentence the district court had imposed as being substantively unreasonable. It is difficult to overstate how rare it is for this kind of a challenge to work. District judges are given a high degree of deference for their exercises of discretion in sentencing. Before I took the case, only about fifteen out of over a million such challenges had succeeded at the federal level. The Sixth Circuit took over a year to decide the case, but our win made it sixteen instead of fifteen.
That’s incredible. Did you consider working for a public interest litigation group, or somewhere that you could do this kind of work other than academia?
I did, but I have also had an interest in conducting research and publishing legal scholarship on issues relevant to appellate litigation. Around the same time as I started to have success in my pro bono appellate work, I was getting published in prominent journals such as the California Law Review Online and Michigan Law Review Online. Being a clinical professor seemed like a natural fit for my desire to keep litigating and pursuing my research.
Well, we are very glad to have you here at UVA Law. What goals do you have for the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic?
Professor Daniel Ortiz did a fantastic job running the SCOTUS clinic here, and it is in a strong position. Building a clinic up to this level takes vision and a lot of hard work. It requires a high level of entrepreneurship and engagement from your professors, students, and staff. My hope is to build on that foundation. First, I hope to continue building out the Appellate Network and leveraging that for our clinic students’ success. Second, I am excited to bring the En Banc Institute to UVA Law. It is a program that helps to prepare attorneys who will be arguing in front of a Circuit Court sitting en banc. That will give clinic students the opportunity to argue against litigators at the highest level of appellate practice. Hopefully, one day we could even host the Fourth Circuit sitting en banc. I don’t think that has ever been done at a law school before, and it would be an incredible experience.
Is there anything you would like to tell students who are interested in both the Appellate Litigation Clinic and the SCOTUS clinic?
To a certain extent, they will flow together. I will work with Scott Ballenger and Cate Stetson closely. In some sense,there is not a bright line between the work you do as a clinic member for one vs. the other. But there are two differences worth mentioning. First, in the SCOTUS clinic, I will be trying some creative ways to find more cases for students to work on. Because the federal government is not appealing cases they have lost below with as much frequency, there is a bit of a void in federal cases the Supreme Court is granting cert on. That is being filled by state cases, a number of them being brought by state solicitors general. We will be looking at ways to get involved in those state cases, which should be exciting. Second, while appellate clinics operate almost as an independent law firm, by the nature of Supreme Court practice we will work with law firm partners who are part of the Supreme Court bar. For example, right now we’re working with Covington and Vinson & Elkins. It helps to have additional voices in the room and makes for an engaging, collaborative process.
Terrific. Alright Professor, now for the lightning round.
Oh boy.
Favorite restaurant in Charlottesville?
Mas. It was the first place I had tapas while I was an undergrad here.
Virginian or Biltmore?
The Virginian always gave off a genteel vibe, while Bilt was more fratty but also more chill. My friends and I mostly hung out at what was then called Buddhist Biker Bar, now Crozet Pizza.
Favorite season?
Chicago: non-winter. Here: right now.
Favorite coffee spot?
Twisted Tea Bazaar.
---
Interviewed by Nikolai Morse ‘24
[1] 974 F.3d 670 (6th Cir. 2020).