Before Commencement, Appellate Litigation Clinic Students Savor Success
May 14, 2019

Aaron Steeg (Lā19) and Claire Cahill (Lā19) with Professor Erica Hashimoto of the Appellate Litigation Clinic after Cahill argued before the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in January.
Just before graduation, Claire Cahill (Lā19), Aaron Steeg (Lā19) and Dominick Schumacher (Lā19) had an extra reason to celebrate.
The client they were representing in Professor Erica Hashimotoās Appellate Litigation Clinic ā an inmate who had been serving a life sentence since 1988 ā was granted parole on April 30.
The crimes for which the client, Tom Bowling, was incarcerated were serious ones, including capital murder stemming from a botched robbery. Yet Bowling was 17 years old in the 1980s, when two adult men told him to rob a convenience store. He became eligible for parole in 2005, but was denied every year since, due to the nature of the crime.
The students asserted that those who committed crimes as juveniles needed to be treated differently with respect to parole. āYou have to consider their diminished culpability, when they actually committed the crime, and their greater capacity for rehabilitation,ā Steeg said.
The students got the case after Bowlingās pro se habeas corpus petition was dismissed by the federal district court in Virginia. Bowling had argued that the Virginia Parole Board was not giving him the consideration to which he was constitutionally entitled as a juvenile offender. When Bowling appealed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the Fourth Circuit assigned the matter to the Georgetown Law clinic.
So at the start of their final year, the students were tasked with an opening brief to the Fourth Circuit, due in November. After the Virginia attorney generalās office responded, the students submitted another brief, written in two weeks. āWe were all hands on deck,ā Steeg said.
They lost in the Fourth Circuit ā but ultimately won their clientās release. āThese three students devoted an incredible amount of work and time fighting to gain their clientās freedom,ā Hashimoto said. āIt is so gratifying when that work results in a client going home. Ā And because they experienced a defeat in the Fourth Circuit, I think they all recognize how special it is to win our clientās release.ā
Practical Legal Experience
Cahill, who had discovered moot court as an undergraduate at Patrick Henry College, worked for a D.C. nonprofit advocacy organization before entering Georgetown Lawās evening program. āI liked working, and thatās what drew me to Georgetown, the evening program,ā she said, noting that the evening program is ranked the best in the country. āI didnāt want to just go right back to school, I wanted to work at the same time ā getting that practical hands-on experience. Law students are in demand for all different kinds of jobs during law school, so I worked in a prosecutorās office, I interned at the D.C. District Court, I worked for two different law firmsā¦all because I wanted to experience the legal world, not just read about it.ā
Cahill also signed up for Hashimotoās clinic, which is possible for an evening student. āBecause of my moot court background, Iāve always had an interest in doing appellate advocacy,ā she said. āIn the clinic, you get to see the entire life cycle of a case.ā
Working with Hashimoto was āextremely helpful.ā āI had written some briefs for class, and jobs have given me the opportunity to draft briefs ā but I had always found it to be a frustrating process, to wed the informational side of a brief with the advocacy side,ā she said. āIād never had anybody walk through step by step, how to create an argument and how to advocate for a client.ā
Though Steegās previous brief writing experience was limited to his first-year Legal Research and Writing class, he was up for the challenge. A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, Steeg came to Georgetown Law after working in New York and Chicago as a sports agent. He successfully tried out for Georgetown Lawās Moot Court team, competing and coaching during his 2L and 3L years. āI really enjoyed the appellate advocacy side of things, which is why I decided to apply to the clinic,ā he said. āThe clinic only confirmed my interest in the appellate side of litigation.ā
During his 1L summer, he worked in the U.S. Attorneyās Office in Maryland; during his 2L summer, he was a summer associate at Winston & Strawn. Taking Professor David Vladeckās Federal Courts class also helped with his clinic work, Steeg said, since he learned the procedural rules.
āThe reason I wanted to do a clinic in the first place was, you get to a point in your legal education where you are ready to put into practice all the things that youāve learned ā especially for me, having worked before,ā he said. āI was really anxious to have real clients and to do meaningful work that was real and not just hypothetical.ā
Dream Team
The students mooted the case at Georgetown Lawās Supreme Court Institute before a panel of experts that any advocate would envy: Professors Dori Bernstein, Irv Gornstein, Steve Goldblatt, David Vladeck and Roy Englert. And on January 29, Cahill argued the case as a student attorney in the Fourth Circuit.
āHopefully, itās not a once in a lifetime opportunity, but it was incredible getting to do it so early in my career,ā Cahill said, noting that even her law firm colleagues were surprised.
āIt was an amazing experience as a student, to be able to sit at counsel table and appear before the Fourth Circuit ā to just watch how everything worked,ā Steeg said. āIt gives you a lot of confidence going into practice, that you can do it, youāve done it before.ā
The students have high praise for Hashimoto. āI have no doubt that I am a better legal writer, better legal researcher, better oral advocate by far than I was before the clinic, due to her coaching,ā Steeg said.
At the oral argument, the students met their clientās mother and other family members. Bowling’s mother showed the students a picture of their client, with whom they had conversed over the phone but had never seen. After the argument, the students went into āParole Mode,ā gearing up for the next parole process. With the help of 3L student Schumacher and Hashimoto, they examined the trial and sentencing transcripts, and gathered statements from each family member, setting out to convince the Virginia Parole Board that Bowling should be freed.
Powerful
In a published opinion issued April 2, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit rejected the studentsā assertions that the Parole Boardās repeated denial of Bowlingās parole applications, without considering the mitigating qualities of youth, violated his Eighth Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment) and Fourteenth Amendment Due Process rights. The Fourth Circuit agreed with Virginia that the Parole Board was not required to consider age-related characteristics unique to juvenile offenders when it processed Bowlingās parole applications.
To the students, it was disappointing. A favorable Fourth Circuit opinion would have certainly helped. āIt was frustrating, but it was also a good learning experience,ā Cahill said. āThe argument is important, but ultimately, thatās not necessarily what it is going to turn on.ā
In the end, the Parole Board ultimately granted Bowlingās release, thanks to the work done by Hashimoto, the students, and the family showing his susceptibility to peer pressure, low self-esteem as a juvenile, and his subsequent maturity in prison: his GED, his certification as an HVAC technician and teacher. āHe is truly a different person, in the 31 years that he has been in prison,ā Steeg noted.
ā[The clinic has] definitely been the most meaningful thing Iāve done in law school ā Itās a hell of a way to go out,ā Steeg said, after he finished his last exam on May 8. In the fall, heāll be working at Winston & Strawn. Cahill will be clerking for Judge Trevor McFadden on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and join Sidley Austin for a year and before clerking on the Third Circuit with Judge Thomas L. Ambro (Lā75).
āIt really does show you the impact that good representation can have,ā Steeg said. āIt is a powerful feeling to have freed someone, to give a family member back, to give Mr. Bowling the opportunity to live a productive life.ā