2019 Lawyers of the Year: William F. Lee, WilmerHale.

Byline: Correy E. Stephenson

William F. Lee is no stranger to high-profile legal cases.

The Boston lawyer who has more than 200 trials and north of 100 appellate arguments under his belt acted as lead trial counsel for tech giant Apple in the long-running litigation against Samsung; served as associate counsel to the independent counsel in the Iran-Contra investigation; and worked pro bono on behalf of the Boston Athletic Association in the wake of the 2013 Marathon bombings.

But his representation of Harvard University last year in the case challenging its admissions policies as discriminatory was more personal.

"The Harvard case may be at the top of the pile," he says. "I am the child of immigrants, Harvard has been a big part of our family for many years, I've been involved in Harvard governance for the last 16 years, and at the end of the day this issue is so important."

In the case, Students for Fair Admissions accused Harvard of relying too heavily on race as a factor in its admissions and specifically discriminating against Asian American applicants.

Figuring the case could go the distance to the U.S. Supreme Court, Harvard retained WilmerHale and Lee's good friend, former Solicitor General Seth Waxman. But when the decision was made to seek a trial, Lee recused himself from his activities at the school and joined the legal team.

Last October, U.S. District Court Judge Allison D. Burroughs rejected the plaintiff's allegations.

"The Court will not dismantle a very fine admissions program that passes constitutional muster, solely because it could do better," she wrote. "For purposes of this case, at least for now, ensuring diversity at Harvard relies, in part, on race conscious admissions."

***

Q. Why did you decide to ask for a trial?

A. Harvard was specifically picked as the defendant for this lawsuit alleging intentional racial discrimination. The question of how to defend against that type of headline-grabbing accusation was a real challenge, and our most important decision was to lay open the admissions process and let people see it. Sure, if you produce 100,000 emails there are going to be one or two that someone is not going to like in retrospect, but we thought that it was very important to pull back the curtain and show the court and the public how Harvard handles admissions. The details of the process are the best indication that nobody was discriminating against anybody.

Q. What were some of the pivotal moments during trial?

...