Noah is a civil rights attorney and graduate of Georgetown University Law Center, where he served as the editor-in-chief of the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law. He has appeared on Huffington Post Live and Al Jazeera to discuss issues ranging from civil liberties to unpaid internships. In addition, Noah is a graduate of Columbia University, where he studied American government and history.
Noah is admitted to practice law in New York State and the District of Columbia. His admission to the California state bar is pending.
( 01 )
2011 through August 2017
Over forty articles about politics, faith, and more.
"Any number of neo-Nazis—no matter how few—is too many, and a threat to all minorities. We must oppose them effectively and with confidence."
"Bernie Sanders' long record reveals a man with the moral judgment we need in a president."
"Take Berniecrats and what we have to say seriously and engage us with respect. If you cannot do that, perhaps it is you who does not understand how politics works: Votes must be earned."
( 02 )
J.D., Georgetown University Law Center
Honors: Cum Laude
Editor-in-Chief, Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law; Student Attorney, Institute for Public Representation: Civil Rights; Student Fellow, Center for the Constitution
A.B., Columbia University: Politics & History
Honors: Political Science, Departmental Honors
Editor, The Commentariat
( 03 )
16 Geo. J. Gender & L. 323 (2015)
There Can Be No Assumption: Taking Seriously Challenges to Polygamy Bans in Light of Developments in Religious Freedom Jurisprudence
Anti-polygamy laws today are more vulnerable than they were during Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1878), but not constitutionally infirm.
15 Geo. J. Gender & L. 57 (2014)
Annual Review: Assisted Reproductive Technologies (Ed.)
A co-edited review of the state of the law in the area of assisted reproductive technology ("ART").
( 04 )
Significant Court Filings.
May 9, 2018
Author: Opening Brief, Lambert v. Tesla, Inc., 18-15203 (9th Cir.)
Claims arising under a Reconstruction-era federal civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, should not be compelled to arbitration, in light of congressional intent and the incompatibility of its fundamental purposes with mandatory alternative dispute resolution.
October 30, 2017
Author: Brief Amicus Curiae for the Civil Rights Forum in Support of Respondents, Masterpiece Cakeshop, LTD. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, et. al., No. 16-111
The religious freedom and freedom of speech arguments made by a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding have already been advanced rejected in the context of employment discrimination. Changing course would undermine civil rights statutes designed to prevent discrimination in the workplace.