Reeves Anderson is a partner in the firm’s Appellate & Supreme Court practice. He has represented businesses, individuals, states, and foreign governments in appeals and trial litigation across the United States, including over 40 cases before the US Supreme Court. His civil practice covers a broad spectrum of legal issues, with a particular focus on cross-border disputes, sovereign immunity, and complex commercial conflicts.

Mr. Anderson’s work has earned nationwide recognition for innovative advocacy and commitment to client service. A 2016 law review article on “stellar briefs” featured his 2013 Supreme Court merits brief in Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl for its “brilliance” and “powerful emotional hooks” that “hit hard and fast” to prove his clients’ position “was not only legally sound, but also fair” (Indiana Law Review, 2016). The National Law Journal describes Mr. Anderson as a “court aficionado,” and the American Lawyer remarked that clients “speak with reverence” about his dedication to their cause.

Mr. Anderson also has received accolades for his legal scholarship. His “excellent annual reviews of Supreme Court amicus practice” for the National Law Journal have been cited by The New York Times, Washington Post, and numerous law reviews and textbooks (American Legal Process, 2d ed. 2020). His legal research and commentary have appeared in the Virginia Journal of International Law and in the preeminent science journal Nature. In 2015, he received the US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform’s national Research and Policy Award for “exceptional contributions to the intellectual foundation of legal reform” based on his “groundbreaking” work on extraterritorial jurisdiction and foreign-judgment enforcement.

Mr. Anderson was appointed to the firm’s Pro Bono Committee in 2011. In his pro bono work, he has advocated for veterans’ rights, prisoners’ rights, voting rights, and parental rights, and also addressed immigration reform, gun violence prevention, religious nondiscrimination, disaster relief, and wrongful convictions.

Mr. Anderson graduated as valedictorian from North Carolina State University with degrees in political science and chemistry. He earned his JD from Yale Law School and a Master’s degree from Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland.

Experience

  • Carpenter v. Murphy, No. 17-1107 (U.S. Supreme Court, pending). Successfully petitioned for certiorari on behalf of the State of Oklahoma on whether Congress disestablished tribal boundaries of Indian Territory in eastern Oklahoma upon statehood in 1907.
  • BNSF Railway Co. v. Loos, 139 S. Ct. 893 (2019). Represented petitioner at the merits stage, where the Supreme Court held in BNSF’s favor that when a railroad company pays an employee for time lost due to an on-the-job injury, that payment is taxable compensation under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act.
  • Frank v. Walker, 135 S. Ct. 7 (2014). Represented petitioners in successful emergency application to reinstate injunction of Wisconsin’s voter ID law for the 2014 general election.
  • Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 570 U.S. 637 (2013). Represented petitioners at the certiorari and merits stages, where the Supreme Court held that the Indian Child Welfare Act did not preclude the firm’s clients from adopting a child of Native American heritage whom they had raised since birth.
  • Tarrant Regional Water Dist. v. Herrmann, 569 U.S. 614 (2013). Represented respondents in an water rights dispute between Oklahoma and Texas over the Red River Compact, in which the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Oklahoma’s water statutes are neither preempted by the Compact nor prohibited by the Commerce Clause.
  • Marx v. General Revenue Corp., 568 U.S. 371 (2013). Represented respondent at the merits stage, where the Supreme Court affirmed the right of prevailing defendants to seek litigation costs under the federal debt collections statute.
  • Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, 569 U.S. 108 (2013). Represented multinational companies as amici curiae regarding the extraterritorial scope of the Alien Tort Statute.
  • Kloeckner v. Solis, 568 U.S. 41 (2012). Represented petitioner at the certiorari and merits stages, where the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a federal employee who claims that an adverse employment action violates an antidiscrimination statute should seek judicial review in district court, not the Federal Circuit.
  • Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428 (2011). Represented petitioner at the merits stage, where the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the deadline for filing a notice of appeal with the Veterans Court does not have jurisdictional consequences.
  • In re Verizon Insurance Coverage Appeals, --- A.3d ---, 2019 WL 5616263 (Del. 2019). Represented a division of AIG in a high-stakes appeal and secured unanimous reversal of summary judgment over the scope of coverage in AIG’s directors-and-officers insurance policies. The Delaware Supreme Court directed entry of judgment in favor of the firm’s client.
  • Eliahu v. Jewish Agency for Israel, 919 F.3d 709 (2d Cir. 2019). Represented senior foreign government officials in RICO lawsuit to secure affirmance of dismissal on immunity and merits grounds. The court also affirmed a precedent-setting nationwide injunction prohibiting plaintiffs from filing additional lawsuits without the approval of a New York federal judge.
  • Fuentes v. Zaragoza, 555 S.W.3d 141 (Tex. App. 2018). Represented prominent Mexican industrialist to successfully overturn one of the largest divorce awards in US history. The underlying default judgment, rendered in Houston, Texas, included $537 million in damages and the turnover of 89 global business entities. The appellate court unanimously reversed the decree in its entirety on legal and evidentiary grounds.
  • Ben Haim v. Edri, 183 A.3d 252 (N.J. App. Div. 2018). Successfully represented foreign judges and government official on question of first impression in state court on the scope of conduct-based foreign official immunity.
  • Schermerhorn v. State of Israel, 876 F.3d 351 (D.C. Cir. 2017). Represented the State of Israel and its ministries to secure dismissal based on sovereign immunity in lawsuit arising out of the interception of the “Gaza flotilla” in May 2010.
  • Sea Search Armada v. Republic of Colombia, 821 F. Supp. 2d 268 (D.D.C. 2011), aff'd 522 F. App'x 1 (D.C. Cir. 2013). Successfully defended dismissal of all claims against a South American government in a multi-billion dollar lawsuit over the rights to recover a sunken treasure ship.
  • WPIX, Inc. v. ivi, Inc., 691 F.3d 275 (2d Cir. 2012). Successfully represented television broadcasters on appeal in a copyright infringement suit to prevent unauthorized retransmission of TV programming over the Internet.
  • United States ex rel. Batiste v. SLM Corporation, 659 F.3d 1204 (D.C. Cir. 2011). Successfully defended a leading financial service provider on appeal under the False Claims Act.

Perspectives

A Calm but Impressive 2018-19 Term for 'Friends of the Court' (pdf)
The National Law Journal
Speak for Yourself: An Update on Compelled Commercial Disclosure
Advisory
With a Lot of Help From Their Friends
Daily Journal's "Weekly Appellate Report" Podcast
Supreme Court Amicus Curiae Review: 'Friends of the Court' Roared Back in 2017–18 Term (pdf)
The National Law Journal
In Quiet Term, a Drop in Amicus Curiae at the Supreme Court (pdf)
The National Law Journal's Supreme Court Brief
More

Recognition

The Legal 500 US
Appellate (2019)
US Chamber Institute for Legal Reform Research and Policy Award (2015)

Credentials

Education
  • JD, Yale Law School
  • MPhil, Trinity College Dublin
  • BA/BS, North Carolina State University
Admissions
  • Colorado
  • District of Columbia
  • New York
  • Supreme Court of the United States
Clerkships
  • US District Court, Southern District of New York, The Honorable Stephen C. Robinson
Overview

Email Disclaimer