Photo of David R. Roth

Dave is a Partner in the firm’s Litigation Department, where he focuses on appellate and complex civil litigation. As a member of the firm’s Appellate Group, Dave has successfully represented clients in the U.S. Supreme Court, the federal courts of appeal, and various state supreme and intermediate appellate courts.

The Nine returned to action late last week, issuing decisions in three (well, really just two) closely watched cases:


Read More Pulsifer v. United States (No. 22-340)

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its first major decision of the term in Trump v. Anderson (No. 23-719). To the surprise of almost no one, the Court unanimously reversed the Colorado Supreme Court’s removal of candidate Trump from the ballot in Colorado’s upcoming presidential primary, clearing the way for Trump to appear on the ballot not only in Colorado but also in the other
Read More Trump v. Anderson (No. 23-719)

The Nine issued another pair of unanimous decisions this week addressing questions other than whether Donald Trump “engaged in insurrection” after taking an oath as an “officer of the United States.”


Read More Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co., LLC (No. 22-500) and McElrath v. Georgia (No. 22-721)

Most Court-watchers’ attention last Thursday was devoted to the oral argument in Trump v. Anderson (No. 23-719), where candidate Trump seeks to reverse the Colorado Supreme Court’s recent decision barring him from that state’s primary ballot on the ground that he “engaged in insurrection” in and around January 6, 2021. So, they can be forgiven for missing the Court’s first two real decisions of
Read More Murray v. UBS Securities, Inc. (No. 22-660), Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz (No. 22-846)

On Tuesday, the Court issued its first decision of the term: Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer (No. 22-429). This was set to be a significant decision on the standing of so-called “testers”—individuals who file lawsuits against businesses whose websites are not ADA compliant even if they don’t have genuine plans to patronize the businesses in question. But we’ll have to wait for an answer

Read More Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer (No. 22-429)