Two hundred and fifty years ago this month, 56 men signed their names to a transformational document that made an audacious promise: government exists to secure rights, not to grant them. This foundational belief was a radical idea in 1776, and it remains vigorously contested in courtrooms today.
History has taught us that democracy is not self-sustaining; it is not merely a form of government, but an ideal that must be continually pursued, case-by-case, generation-by-generation. Hangley Aronchick has been part of that ever-evolving debate, which is essential to the American experiment, since our inception more than thirty years ago.
So much of the work we do sits at the intersection of law and democratic life. Community engagement and democratic principles aren’t values we arrived at — they are the foundation on which our firm was built. They shape the cases we pursue, the relationships we build, the standards we hold ourselves to and the causes we champion outside of the courtroom.
At this remarkable milestone, we take a moment to reflect on how our efforts help shape the issues that sculpt and maintain our democracy — and to recognize that the work of protecting it is never finished.
Voting Rights
The right to vote is the foundational democratic act. Protecting it, in recent years, has required lawyers to move quickly and to think clearly under immense pressure and scrutiny.
Our team has been in the middle of some of Pennsylvania’s most consequential election law litigation. Starting in 2021, we represented the Pennsylvania Department of State in defending Act 77, the state law allowing no-excuse mail-in voting for millions of Pennsylvanians. After a divided lower court initially held Act 77 unconstitutional on a 3-2 vote, the Department of State successfully appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which upheld the statute and maintained the right of all Pennsylvania electors to vote by mail.
Our team also represented the Secretary of the Commonwealth in separate litigation involving third-party access to voting machines in Fulton County. After county commissioners allowed an unauthorized third-party firm to conduct probing inspections of voting machine data, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court vindicated the Secretary’s position that he is empowered to issue directives protecting the security of electronic voting machines. Along the way, the Supreme Court granted the Secretary’s motion to hold the County and its counsel in contempt for allowing another third-party inspection of the voting machines—in violation of an injunctive order obtained by the Secretary—and the Commonwealth was awarded its legal fees.
Redistricting
We were part of the legal team that won a landmark ruling before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that struck Pennsylvania’s congressional district map as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The decision led to a redrawn map.
Holding the System Accountable
Hangley Aronchick proudly represented a class of approximately 2,400 children criminally sentenced by two Luzerne County judges who had secretly accepted more than $2.6 million in illicit payments from developers of private juvenile detention facilities. Many of the children were sentenced without counsel, and their parents were billed for their incarceration, in one of the most disturbing judicial corruption cases in American history.
The case remains a testament to the importance of public accountability and the responsibility lawyers have to protect the rights of our most vulnerable citizens.
The Limits of Government Power
Hanley Aronchick has filed amicus briefs arguing that executive orders cannot override constitutional guarantees and that evidence obtained through torture cannot be used by the government in legal proceedings. We are currently litigating a challenge to the EEOC’s efforts to compel the University of Pennsylvania to produce lists of Jewish faculty and students, on the ground that civil rights laws do not authorize surveillance of academic communities based on ethnicity or religion.
Attorneys convinced the Third Circuit to reject a challenge to a ban on fracking in the Delaware River Basin, with a precedent-setting decision that clarified when state legislators do—and do not—have standing.
Protecting Families
We served as co-counsel in Whitewood v. Wolf, the case that overturned Pennsylvania’s Defense of Marriage Act and established the right of same-sex couples to marry in the Commonwealth. The court held that Pennsylvania’s law burdened a fundamental right and discriminated based on sexual orientation and gender. As a result, Pennsylvania became the 19th state in the nation to recognize marriage equality — months before the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell made it the law of the land.
More recently, we authored a key amicus brief which helped to shape the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Junior v. Glover, which adopted the doctrine of intent-based parentage in the context of assisted reproductive technology. The ruling established important legal protections for Pennsylvania families who conceive children through IVF or surrogacy.
Though they were litigated a decade apart, both cases demonstrate the firm’s enduring commitment to standing for equal rights and protections for all Pennsylvanians.
The City and Its Institutions
We take great pride in maintaining the public institutions that define the legal profession and form the backbone of civic life in Philadelphia. Three former City Solicitors of Philadelphia — Mark Aronchick, who served under Mayor Bill Green; Joe Dworetzky, who served under Mayor Ed Rendell; and Sozi Tulante, who served under Mayor Jim Kenney — have practiced at our firm.
Our environmental team serves as outside environmental counsel to the City of Philadelphia. We have represented District Attorney Larry Krasner and his office in several disputes, and helped the city defend the controversial Philadelphia Beverage Tax.
Their public service is a reminder that the practice of law is deeply interwoven in the fabric of our city and that we, as a firm, have an obligation to preserve these core pillars of democracy for future generations of attorneys.
What 250 Years Ask of Us
The founders envisioned a system premised on the notion that power would be tested and rights challenged — and vindicated — in court. Two hundred and fifty years on, we continue the hard work that democracy requires. As a firm, we are proud of the cases we have taken, particularly those where our position was not the popular one.
We are equally grateful to the clients who have trusted us to bring or defend those actions, and to the lawyers across this firm who have committed to the causes that make that trust possible.
Here’s to 250 years of an imperfect, still-unfinished experiment and to the work that keeps it going.
Share This