Pro Bono & Community Commitment

Berger Montague attorneys are fully encouraged to work with non-profit organizations, community programs, and associations to perform pro bono legal work.

At Berger Montague, pro bono work is not an afterthought—it’s at the heart of who we are. We believe every lawyer has a responsibility to use their skills to expand access to justice, and we are proud to have dedicated over 2,200 pro bono hours as a firm in 2024 worth $1.8 million. Our attorneys partner with local nonprofits and legal aid organizations to provide critical representation to individuals and communities who otherwise could not afford counsel. From protecting tenants facing eviction, to advocating for minors who have experienced abuse or neglect, to supporting immigrants seeking safety and stability, our team approaches pro bono matters with the same dedication and excellence we bring to every client. This commitment reflects our core values as a firm: service, integrity, and a belief that the law should work for everyone.

Berger Montague partners with the following organizations to serve individual clients in need:

• Community Legal Services (“CLS”)
• Philadelphia Volunteers for the Indigent Program (“Philly VIP”)
• Public Justice
• Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (“PILCOP”)
• Support Center for Child Advocates

Berger Montague is also proud to serve in leadership roles in high-impact litigation, representing groups and causes with far-reaching community and national significance. A few recent examples include:

Trump et al. v. Slaughter et al., No. 25-332 (U.S.). In 2025, Berger Montague filed a high-profile amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of 40 organizations from 10 states and the District of Columbia committed to consumer protection, data privacy, and competitive markets. The case, Trump v. Slaughter, challenges the President’s removal of Federal Trade Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter—an independent commissioner fired without cause despite statutory protections enacted by Congress to prevent at-will removal. Our brief urges the Court to reinstate Commissioner Slaughter and reaffirm nearly a century of precedent, beginning with Humphrey’s Executor (1935), that safeguards the independence of agencies like the FTC. These protections ensure that commissioners can act based on law and expertise—not political pressure—preserving the integrity of consumer protection and market fairness.

Estados Unidos Mexicanos v. Diamondback Shooting Sports Inc., No. 22-cv-4472 (D. Ariz.). Berger Montague, alongside Global Action on Gun Violence (“GAGV”), Everytown for Gun Safety (“Everytown”), Hilliard Shadowen LLP, and others, represent the government of Mexico in groundbreaking litigation against Arizona-based gun dealers alleged to have fueled cartel violence by recklessly enabling the trafficking of military-style weapons across the border.

McGruder et al. v. Mnuchin, et al, No. 20-cv-03590 (E.D. Pa.). In 2020, Berger Montague partnered with Community Legal Services of Philadelphia (CLS) and the Villanova Federal Tax Law Clinic to challenge the IRS’s unlawful denial of stimulus payments to people with disabilities and their children. As a direct result of this litigation, the IRS reversed its national policy, granting SSI and Social Security recipients additional time to apply for payments—a change that safeguarded the financial stability of approximately 250,000 families nationwide during the pandemic.

Transgender Care. In 2025, Berger Montague, in partnership with the Women’s Law Project, brought claims on behalf of five transgender youth who were receiving gender-affirming care at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (“UPMC”) Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh but had their care abruptly terminated. The complaint, filed with the Pennsylvania Commission on Human Relations, alleges that UPMC’s decision to stop performing all gender-affirming care on youth under the age of 19 amounts to discrimination on the basis of sex and disability under Pennsylvania state law. The complaint seeks injunctive relief on behalf of all transgender youth who had been receiving care at UMPC’s Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, along with certain damages.

American Federation of Teachers v. U.S. Department of Education, No. 1:25-cv-802 (D.D.C.). In 2025, Berger Montague filed suit on behalf of the American Federation of Teachers, alleging that the Trump Administration unlawfully eliminated certain affordable loan repayment plans. These repayment plans are crucial for public servants like teachers to be able to access Public Service Loan Forgiveness (“PSLF”). On October 17, 2025, the Trump Administration agreed to a series of actions that will protect borrowers enrolled in income-driven repayment plans and deliver student debt relief to borrowers who had been making payments under these plans for decades, as required by federal law. Critically, the Trump Administration agreed to procedures so that borrowers who are eligible to have their loans canceled in 2025 don’t get stuck with a large tax bill due to the Administration’s processing delays.

United States of America v. Donald R. Felton, No: 23-1352 (7th Cir.). Berger Montague represented Donald Felton in a federal criminal appeal challenging the constitutionality of a search warrant. Mr. Felton won his appeal in November 2025. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously reversed the lower court, holding that the government’s conduct justified an “inference of reckless disregard for the truth.” As a result, Mr. Felton is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on whether the government’s conduct was “deliberate or reckless.”