Slarskey LLC Files Two Amicus Briefs Upholding Civil Rights and Religious Liberty

October 8, 2025

Slarskey LLC, through its Pro Bono Department, is proud to have represented two religious organizations in separate federal cases addressing recent threats to core constitutional rights, including religious liberty, free expression, and academic independence.

Partner Adam Hollander and Associate Luc C. Pierre-Louis, with support from paralegal Brooklyn Hollander, recently represented the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA), pro bono, in filing an amicus brief before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in American Association of University Professors v. United States Department of Justice, No. 25-1529. The case challenges the federal government’s unprecedented decision to terminate over $400 million in research funding to Columbia University and to condition future funding on sweeping restrictions affecting speech, academic inquiry, and institutional independence. The brief—filed on behalf of a national coalition of Jewish community advocates—urges the Court to reject the false choice between confronting antisemitism and preserving the freedoms that make democracy possible.

Separately, Partner David Slarskey, with contributions from Counsel Elena Roberts and former summer associate Akansha Khurana, represented 14 Muslim organizations subjected to religious land-use discrimination, filing an amicus brief in Muslims on Long Island, Inc., Imran Makda, and Moeen Qureshi v. Town of Oyster Bay, Civ. Action No. 2:25-cv-00428 in the District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The case arises from a six-year campaign in which local officials blocked a mosque expansion through arbitrary zoning changes and manufactured procedural barriers. On behalf of Muslim organizations nationwide that have faced similar obstacles, Slarskey LLC’s brief highlights how facially neutral zoning laws can be weaponized to mask religious bias—contravening both the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) and fundamental guarantees of equal treatment under law.

Both cases underscore how constitutional freedoms—whether protecting the right to worship or the right to teach and dissent—stand or fall together. In each, the government invoked the language of safety or order to justify actions that suppress civil rights, chill expression, and erode equality. Slarskey LLC’s pro bono efforts in these matters reflect our belief that safeguarding one community’s rights strengthens the rights of all.

“These cases demonstrate that religious liberty and academic freedom are not competing values—they are intertwined pillars of a free society,” said David Slarskey. “Defending them is essential to preserving the rule of law and the democratic principles on which this country stands.”