Supreme Court Appoints Former Clerk to Represent in Post-Conviction Relief Case.
On February 20, 2025, the Supreme Court appointed Kasdin M. Mitchell, a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP, to represent the United States in the case Bowe v. United States.
The appointment came after the federal government decided to no longer defend a portion of the 11th Circuit’s ruling, prompting the Court to enlist an outside attorney to uphold the decision. This marks the sixth time during the current term that the justices have appointed an outside attorney, a practice that is not uncommon but relatively rare, typically occurring once or twice per term.
Kasdin Mitchell’s appointment to argue in Bowe v. United States will be her first appearance before the Court. Prior to this, in 2019, she collaborated with K. Winn Allen, who was appointed as a friend of the court to argue in support of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit’s judgment in Holguin-Hernandez v. United States.
Background of the Case
Michael Bowe was convicted in 2008 for attempted robbery and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence. In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Taylor that attempted Hobbs Act robbery does not qualify as a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A). Following this, Bowe filed a motion for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that his conviction no longer stood.
The 11th Circuit, however, dismissed his motion, citing 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1), which mandates the dismissal of claims presented in a second or successive habeas corpus application that were previously presented. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether this provision applies to motions under § 2255.
The federal government, which had initially opposed review, agreed with Bowe on one key aspect of the case: that the 11th Circuit’s ruling was incorrect on a particular legal issue.
However, the federal government still maintained that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to review the case. This prompted the justices to appoint Mitchell to represent the government in defense of the ruling.
Kasdin M. Mitchell's Role and Expertise
Kasdin M. Mitchell is a highly regarded litigation partner at Kirkland & Ellis. She specializes in complex litigation, including trial and appellate matters. Mitchell has been involved in high-stakes cases, and her legal expertise has earned her a reputation for securing favorable outcomes for clients in various legal areas.
Notably, she was part of the trial team that defended 3M in a bellwether trial in the largest multidistrict litigation in history.
Her involvement in Bowe v. United States will mark her first appearance before the Supreme Court. Mitchell's extensive experience in handling complex legal matters makes her well-suited to argue such a significant case. The appointment of Mitchell underscores the Court's confidence in her ability to address the intricate legal issues at hand, particularly the interpretation of post-conviction relief laws.
Wider Context and Future Implications
The Supreme Court’s decision to appoint an outside attorney is significant, as it reflects the Court’s commitment to ensuring that major legal issues are thoroughly examined, even when the federal government decides not to defend certain aspects of a ruling.
While not a common practice, appointing an external attorney ensures that all sides of a case are represented and that the Court can make fully informed decisions on complex legal matters.
The appointment of a legal expert like Mitchell underscores the importance of having diverse perspectives and high-level expertise when addressing important legal questions.
The outcome of Bowe v. United States could have a lasting impact on post-conviction relief laws, particularly in how courts interpret motions under § 2255 and the applicability of § 2244(b)(1) to second or successive habeas corpus applications. The case may set a precedent for future post-conviction relief cases, offering guidance on how courts approach similar motions in the future.
Looking ahead, the outcome of this case could influence the procedural framework for post-conviction relief proceedings. As the legal landscape evolves, particularly with regard to how federal courts interpret post-conviction motions, cases like Bowe v. United States will play a crucial role in shaping future legal standards.
Given the increasing complexity of federal criminal law, it is expected that cases involving post-conviction relief will continue to present important legal challenges, making the work of legal professionals like Mitchell increasingly pivotal.
In conclusion, the appointment of Kasdin M. Mitchell to argue in Bowe v. United States highlights the Supreme Court's commitment to thorough and impartial legal analysis. As the case progresses, it is expected to have significant implications for post-conviction relief law and the broader legal field.
