Stephen J. Neuberger
Steve is the firm expert on the U.S. and Delaware Constitutions, the author of all of its legal briefs on complex issues of constitutional and civil rights law and takes the lead in responding to all legal arguments by governmental and other wrongdoers as they seek to dodge responsibility when their actions are challenged in court by the Firm.
In addition to many years of representing survivors of childhood sexual abuse, he also has developed a niche practice of representing attorneys targeted for ethics attacks or other retaliation by government officials and others.
Professional Honors and Experiences:
Delaware Today magazine has described Steve as a “pugnacious” attorney whose “cases tend to share a theme: the arbitrary abuse of power,” usually by state and local government officials. He is regularly voted by his peers and honored by Delaware Today in their annual Top Lawyers edition across various practice areas. This most recently includes being voted the top attorney in the state in the area of “Constitutional Law” in 2023, and a top lawyer in “Civil Rights” and “Government Affairs” in years past. In 2018, Delaware Today profiled Steve as the leading civil rights attorney in the State of Delaware. From 2012-2018, Super Lawyers magazine recognized him as a Rising Star of the Delaware Bar. Steve also was profiled by the Delaware Business Times newspaper as one of their “People to Watch in 2019.”
He has developed a broad base of experience in all aspects of § 1983 litigation. His federal and state constitutional law experience includes the following:
- First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – legal issues involving the speech, assembly, petition, free exercise of religion, establishment and press clauses of the First Amendment, including:
- the rarely used First Amendment civil right to legal counsel;
- the common law and First Amendment rights of access by the public and press to judicial records;
- whistleblower retaliation claims brought by public employees invoking the speech, association and petition clauses;
- union association retaliation claims brought by union officials and members;
- political association claims brought by public employees being retaliated against for their political speech and votes;
- association, speech and petition claims on behalf of attorneys being retaliated against by government officials upset over the filing of public corruption lawsuits or public criticism of their actions in the media;
- various First Amendment defenses raised by institutional defendants in opposition to claims under state tort law, ranging from defamation to sexual abuse, assault and conspiracy;
- the use of prayer at the beginning of sessions of public bodies such as school boards;
- the forced closure of churches by the Governor of the State of Delaware; and
- whether the Governor may give preferred, ‘most favored nation’ treatment to one religion while denying it to many others.
- Fourth Amendment – legal issues related to search and seizure standards, including:
- the objective reasonableness standard for excessive force claims brought by private citizens against law enforcement officers and others acting under color of law; and
- whether or not the government may seize a person’s home and evict them from their castle without ever giving them notice or an opportunity to be heard.
- Fifth Amendment – legal issues arising out of the invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination.
- Eighth Amendment – legal issues related to the cruel and unusual punishment standard for excessive force claims brought by convicted inmates.
- Fourteenth Amendment – legal issues involving the due process and equal protection clauses, including:
- procedural due process protections arising from the government’s creation of protected property interests in employment and other valuable benefits;
- substantive due process protections against arbitrary government actions which “shock the judicial conscience;”
- race, national origin, sex and religious discrimination under the equal protection clause;
- the legitimate exercise of democratic legislative power to revive time-barred civil claims without violating due process protections or intruding upon fundamental rights as opposed to the forbidden revival of criminal ones;
- excessive force claims brought by pretrial detainees challenging the objective reasonableness of a state action;
- shocks the conscience substantive due process claims against police officers who rape and sexually assault arrestees;
- the adequacy of notice and hearing rights for public employees as well as private citizens being deprived of valuable government benefits;
- whether or not the government may show up at your door, evict you from your home and seize it without ever giving you notice or an opportunity to be heard;
- a citizen’s due process right to privacy to not to have his confidential medical information disclosed and disseminated by government officials; and
- Batson challenges to discrimination in jury selection.
- Article 1, § 1 of the Delaware Constitution – legal issues arising out of the expansive religious worship protections of the Delaware Constitution, detailed provisions broader than those contained within the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
- Article 1, § 7 – legal issues arising out of the invocation of the privilege against self-incrimination.
- Article 1, § 9 – legal issues related to the meaning of the “law of the land” and “due course of law” clauses and how they allow the General Assembly to revive previously time barred civil claims as an exercise of legitimate legislative power without trespassing upon vested or fundamental rights of the citizenry.
Two matters best demonstrate the depth and breadth of his experience in constitutional law. First, his recent December 2017 recovery of more than $7.5 million in the correctional officer case of Floyd, et al. v. Markell, et al.,C.A.No.17-431-RGA (D.Del.), which in the words of the Delaware State News, is believed “to be the largest state-paid settlement in Delaware’s 230 year history.” Steve’s mastery of the subtle nuances of the substantive due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the “shocks the judicial conscience” legal standard in the context of affirmatively created dangerous working conditions for public employees, and exhaustive 70 page legal brief addressing the same, was determinative of this result.
Finally, in the area of childhood sexual abuse, the ultimate recovery of over $110 million from several sets of institutional defendants also was the direct result of Steve’s hard work. For eight years his exceptional skills resulted in every legal success in court for the survivors as he set the legal precedents in Delaware – overcoming challenges under the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution as well as repeated attacks under Article 1, § 9 and § 7 of the Delaware Constitution – while repeatedly and successfully upholding the constitutionality of the authority of the Delaware legislature to provide legal relief for survivors of childhood sexual abuse and finally and conclusively convinced the unanimous Delaware Supreme Court of the same.
Education & Background:
Born and raised in Wilmington, Steve won a state championship as a member of the undefeated St. Mark’s boys basketball team in 1995, graduated in 1996 and then attended the University of Delaware, graduating in 2000 with a B.A. in history, with a concentration in American history.
While attending UD, Steve spent several summers working for The Rutherford Institute, an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights located in Charlottesville, Virginia. It was this experience that turned him towards becoming an attorney. In 2003, Steve received his J.D. from Temple University’s Beasley School of Law where he distinguished himself in trial advocacy and received the Barrister’s Award.
While attending Temple, Steve served as Tom’s law clerk and immersed himself in § 1983 law as he began to specialize in briefing complex legal issues in constitutional, civil rights and employment litigation. After graduation, he joined forces with his father Tom and eventually earned firm Directorship thereafter.
Memberships:
Steve was admitted to the Delaware Bar in 2003. He is presently a member of the bars of the United States Supreme Court (2008), the Delaware Supreme Court (2003), the United States Courts of Appeals for the Third Circuit (2004), the Fourth Circuit (2004), and the D.C. Circuit (2004), as well as the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (2004). He is a member of the Delaware State Bar Association, the N.A.A.C.P., the Bar Association of the Third Federal Circuit and the Federalist Society.
Since 2012, Steve has been proud to serve as a member of the Board of Visitors at Temple Law. Appointed by Temple University President Richard Englert, the Board of Visitors advises the law school Dean on various issues to try to ensure the law school curriculum stays responsive to the realities of the legal profession. Since then, Steve has served under the stewardships of Temple Law Deans JoAnne Epps, Greg Mandel and Rachel Rebouché.
Presentations, Lectures & Publications:
Substantive Due Process as a Remedy in Public Employee Death or Serious Injury Cases, Pennsylvania Bar Association, Labor & Employment Law Section, Fall 2019 E-Newsletter
“Civil Justice for Victims of Crime in Delaware” Training Institute presented by The National Center For Victims of Crime and co-sponsored by the Delaware Criminal Justice Council, Delaware Department of Justice, CONTACT Lifeline and the Delaware Coalition Against Domestic Violence – September 8, 2008 – University of Delaware – Newark, DE
- Co-presenter and panel member discussing the options available to Delaware crime victims in the civil justice system.
Rutherford Institute Summer Internship Speaker Series – July 25, 2008 – Charlottesville, VA
- Lectured on the topic of “Litigating in the Public Interest” with specific emphasis on First Amendment free speech and Fourth Amendment excessive force issues.
“Litigating Employment Discrimination Cases” CLE sponsored by the Pennsylvania Bar Institute and the Plaintiff’s Employment Panel of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania – December 7, 2007 – Philadelphia, PA
- Lectured on the topic of “Avoiding the Ethics Minefield after EEOC v. Hora, 239 Fed.Appx. 728 (3d Cir. 2007).”
Rutherford Institute Summer Internship Speaker Series – July 20, 2007 – Charlottesville, VA
- Lectured on the topic of “Litigating in the Public Interest.”
National Employment Lawyers Association, Eastern District of Pennsylvania Chapter – December 13, 2006 – Philadelphia, PA
- Lectured on the case of Springer v. Henry, 435 F.3d 268 (3d Cir. 2006), and the application of First Amendment free speech and petition clause rights in the public employee context.
‘AVA Anthrax Vaccine Seminar’ – October 28, 2006 – Washington, D.C.
- Lectured on the case of Adkins v. Rumsfeld, 289 F.Supp.2d 579 (D.Del. 2005), the application of First Amendment free speech rights in the military context, and the impact of Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 210 (2006), on the free speech rights of members of the military.