Sarah Harris has represented clients in high-stakes appeals in the U.S. Supreme Court and federal and state appellate courts across the country.  She has argued twice before the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as presenting many arguments in federal courts of appeals, and state appellate courts.  Her cases have covered a wide range of topics, including constitutional law, administrative law, class actions, antitrust, False Claims Act litigation, products liability, commercial litigation, and federal civil procedure. Sarah has been recognized in the appellate field as a “Rising Star” by The National Law Journal, a “Next Generation Lawyer” by The Legal 500, and as one of Bloomberg Law’s “Five Fresh Faces to Know in Appellate.”

Sarah clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court of the United States, Judge Laurence Silberman on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and Judge Sandra Lynch on the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Sarah received her undergraduate degree summa cum laude from Princeton University, and her J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard Law School. She also holds a Ph.D. and M. Phil. from the University of Cambridge.

Representative Experience

Though all cases vary and none is predictive, Sarah’s experience includes:

  • Carr v. Saul, No. 19-1442 (consolidated). Argued and prevailed 9-0 before the U.S. Supreme Court in significant administrative-law case concerning whether Social Security claimants must exhaust issues before the agency as a prerequisite to judicial review.
  • Glaxo Group Ltd. v. DRIT (Del. Supreme Court): In a landmark implied-covenant contractual case before the Delaware Supreme Court, won reversal of a jury verdict against GSK awarding $57 million in royalty payments.
  • Salinas v. U.S. Railroad Retirement Board, No. 19-199. Won 5-4 victory on behalf of petitioner Manfredo Salinas, a former railroad worker, in a case involving whether courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review the Railroad Retirement Board’s decisions denying requests to reopen a prior benefits determination.
  • United States Patent & Trademark Office v., 591 U. S. ___ (2020).  Secured significant Supreme Court ruling in favor of client that the addition of a generic top-level domain (".com") to an otherwise generic term can create a protectable trademark.
  • Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, 590 U.S. ___ (2020).  Secured ruling in client’s favor holding that Superfund site landowners cannot sue defendants to implement an alternative cleanup plan that the Environmental Protection Agency has not approved. 
  • Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, 591 U. S. ___ (2020).  Represented coalition of religious groups in support of petitioners’ successful argument that the First Amendment prohibits courts from intervening in religious schools’ employment decisions concerning teachers who instruct students in the faith; amicus brief cited in Supreme Court majority opinion.
  • Espinoza v. Montana Dep’t of Revenue, 591 U. S. ___ (2020).  Represented coalition of members of the United States Congress in support of petitioners’ successful Free Exercise challenge to a Montana provision prohibiting aid to religious schools; amicus brief cited multiple times in Justice Alito’s concurrence.
  • Dolin v. GlaxoSmithKline, 951 F.3d 882 (7th Cir. 2020).  Successfully briefed and argued appeal in which the Seventh Circuit affirmed a judgment in GSK’s favor and refused plaintiff’s bid to vacate the Seventh Circuit’s earlier decision that plaintiff’s inadequate labeling claims were preempted.  In one of the first appellate decisions after the Supreme Court’s preemption decision in Merck v. Albrecht, the Seventh Circuit held that it would have reached the same preemption holding even after Albrecht.  
  • Sexton v. Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Servs., et al., U.S. S.Ct. No. 18-1446 (cert denied Oct. 21, 2019).  Successfully represented Coventry Health and Life Insurance Company in persuading the Supreme Court not to grant review of a case involving Kentucky’s procedures for determining whether to reimburse certain services under Medicaid.
  • Chatfield v. League of Women Voters of Michigan, et al., 140 S. Ct. 429 (2019).  Successfully represented the Michigan Senate in a direct appeal of a three-judge panel decision declaring large portions of Michigan’s state and congressional districting plans an unconstitutional political gerrymander.  The Supreme Court granted the Michigan Senate a stay and vacated and remanded the lower court judgment after deciding Rucho v. Common Cause




Named among “Five Fresh Faces to Know in Appellate," by Bloomberg Law, 2021

“Next Generation Lawyer,” in the category of Appellate Law, The Legal 500, 2017, 2020

“Rising Star,” The National Law Journal, 2017

“Rising Star” for Washington, D.C. Appellate, Super Lawyers, 2014-2017


Other Government Service

Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, United States Department of Justice

back to top