Wen Fa

Attorney

Sacramento

Wen Fa is an attorney at PLF’s national headquarters. He has litigated numerous direct-rep cases dealing with private property, equality under the law, school choice, economic liberty, and the First Amendment.

Wen’s clients include Edmund, a black fourth-grade boy who wants the chance to attend the same schools as his white neighbors; Adam, a fifth-generation business owner who wants to sell his artisanal butter to Wisconsin consumers; and Andy, a voter who wants to wear a shirt with the words “don’t tread on me” when he votes.

Wen has promoted liberty through speeches to Tea Party groups and a panel debate at Berkeley Law. Wen has appeared on radio over a dozen times, and has been quoted in Reason Magazine. He has published a scholarly article in the William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal and shorter pieces in newspapers, PLF’s blog, and Fa on First. He is a member of the PLF’s hiring committee and co-manages the summer clerkship program.

Wen holds a Bachelor’s from the University of Texas at Dallas, a Master’s in Political Theory from the London School of Economics, where he studied under libertarian scholar Chandran Kukathas.  Wen graduated from the University of Michigan Law School in 2013, and worked at Human Rights Initiative in Dallas and Institute for Justice in Austin before joining PLF. Wen is licensed to practice law in California, Texas, and several federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

Wen is the founder of the Sacramento Chapter of America’s Future Foundation, and a board member of the Sacramento Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society.

Outside of work, Wen likes to exercise, play sports, and tell jokes.

Wen Fa is an attorney at PLF’s national headquarters. He has litigated numerous direct-rep cases dealing with private property, equality under the law, school choice, economic liberty, and the First Amendment.

Wen’s clients include Edmund, a black fourth-grade boy who wants the chance to attend the same schools as his white neighbors; Adam, a fifth-generation business owner who wants to sell his artisanal butter to Wisconsin consumers; and Andy, a voter who wants to wear a shirt with the words “don’t tread on me” when he votes.

Wen has promoted liberty through speeches to Tea Party groups and a panel debate at Berkeley Law. Wen has appeared on radio over a dozen times, and has been quoted in Reason Magazine. He has published a scholarly article in the William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal and shorter pieces in newspapers, PLF’s blog, and Fa on First. He is a member of the PLF’s hiring committee and co-manages the summer clerkship program.

Wen holds a Bachelor’s from the University of Texas at Dallas, a Master’s in Political Theory from the London School of Economics, where he studied under libertarian scholar Chandran Kukathas.  Wen graduated from the University of Michigan Law School in 2013, and worked at Human Rights Initiative in Dallas and Institute for Justice in Austin before joining PLF. Wen is licensed to practice law in California, Texas, and several federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

Wen is the founder of the Sacramento Chapter of America’s Future Foundation, and a board member of the Sacramento Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society.

Outside of work, Wen likes to exercise, play sports, and tell jokes.

Read less
Personal Liberties

Vaping Litigation

The Constitution going up in vapor

Electronic nicotine delivery systems—vaping devices and e-cigarettes—first hit U.S. stores in 2007. It didn’t take long for vaping to jump from zero to a $5 billion domestic industry, as entrepreneurs quickly recognized a market hungry for an alternative to traditional cigarettes. In 2016, just as the burgeoning vaping industry was getting off the ground, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stepped in with a rule that deems e-cigarettes as tobacco products, and brand new, severe regulations that will only harm the industry and perhaps overall public health—contrary to the agency’s very mission. Using a unique legal theory, Pacific Legal Foundation is suing the FDA in three separate federal courtrooms—at the same time—on behalf of vape store owners and a harm reduction organization in several states who want to promote a more healthy alternative to smoking. The unconstitutional rule burdens these individuals and organizations in unique ways, but all are united in opposition to its continued enforcement. The FDA’s regulations are not only expensive and onerous, and prevent vaping entrepreneurs from fulfilling what they believe is a humanitarian mission of helping people, but the rule was illegal the second it hit the Federal Register.

Read more
Personal Liberties

Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky

U.S. Supreme Court will review Minnesota’s fashion (non)sense

On February 28, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in our case challenging a Minnesota election law that literally strips free speech rights from the backs of voters. A Minnesota state law prohibits voters from wearing “political” apparel at a polling place. This includes any t-shirt, button, or other item that identifies any political issue and even any organization that is known to take positions on political issues. Voters who wear AFL-CIO or NRA caps are told they must remove them before they can enter the polling place and vote. If they refuse, election officials take their names for possible prosecution and penalties up to $5,000. Lower courts upheld this law on the theory that government can ban all expression, besides voting, at a polling place.

Read more
Personal Liberties

Elster v. City of Seattle, Washington

Seattle’s politician enrichment tax forces property owners to subsidize private political speech and violates the First Amendment

Representing Seattle residents and property owners, PLF sued to overturn Seattle’s ordinance mandating public campaign financing. Under the city’s “democracy voucher” program, each Seattle resident receives four $25 vouchers to support eligible candidates for local political office. The money to fund the voucher program is taken from the city’s property owners via a dedicated levy. The lawsuit argues that these compelled subsidies violate the First Amendment right to refrain from speaking – or funding the speech of another person.

Read more
Post

By Wen Fa

PLF events on Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky

On February 28, PLF will present oral argument in an important First Amendment case before the Supreme Court of the United States. In Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, PLF is … ›

Read more
Post

By Wen Fa

PLF’s Wen Fa speaks to Sacramento Federalist Society on PLF’s Supreme Court case

We’re fighting for all voters, no matter what their views, no matter where they live, for their First Amendment right to free speech.

Read more
Post

By Wen Fa

PLF files opening brief at Supreme Court in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky

PLF is fighting for the Free Speech rights of voters of every political viewpoint, regardless of whether they wish to express their affinity for the Tea Party or the AFL-CIO.

Read more
Post

By Wen Fa

PLF’s Wen Fa to speak at America’s Future Foundation event in D.C.

The America’s Future Foundation, a nationwide network of liberty-minded young leaders, will host me this Friday for a talk on PLF’s latest case in the Supreme Court.

Read more
Post

By Wen Fa

Supreme Court accepts review in PLF’s First Amendment case!

The Supreme Court of the United States granted PLF’s petition for certiorari in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, a First Amendment challenge to a Minnesota law that bans political apparel at the polling place.

Read more
Post

By Wen Fa

Oral argument in PLF’s access regulation challenge on Nov. 17

Next Friday, I’ll be presenting oral argument in the Ninth Circuit in Cedar Point Nursery v. Gould. The case involves a challenge to the ALRB’s access regulation, which allows union organizers to use the private property of agricultural employers to solicit potential union members.

Read more