Joshua I. Hammack

Joshua I. Hammack handles complex commercial litigation and high-profile appellate matters, with a particular focus on statutory interpretation, constitutional rights, product safety, insurance, contracts, and Title IX discrimination. Joshua is a partner in Washington, D.C., and a member of the firm's Commercial and Environmental Litigation Practice Group.

Joshua leads many of the firm’s thorniest appeals as part of the firm's Appellate and Supreme Court practice team. He has briefed and argued matters in the United States Courts of Appeals for the Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits, as well as several state appellate courts. In October 2026, Joshua made his debut before the Supreme Court of the United States. The case concerns the meaning of the word “consumer” in the Video Privacy Protection Act. It is the first case the Supreme Court has ever taken concerning the nearly forty-year-old statute. Joshua and Bailey Glasser were named Law360 “Legal Lions of the Week” when the Court granted the petition for certiorari. Joshua handled the briefs from the petition stage through the merits, and then argued opposite former Solicitor General Paul Clement. Read more about the case here.

Joshua takes great pride in writing compelling legal briefs. He identifies critical issues, develops a deep understanding of each case’s nuances, and then writes about these issues in ways everyone can understand. His briefs often include references to non-legal sources—including such classics as Frankenstein, Calvin & Hobbes, Hoosiers, and The Wizard of Oz.

Joshua has been recognized by Benchmark Litigation as a 40 & Under Litigator in the appellate and commercial areas, a Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyer, and a Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyer, among other recognitions.

Joshua is also a member of Bailey Glasser’s impactful Title IX team, a national leader in protecting collegiate student-athletes under the federal law prohibiting gender discrimination by educational institutions receiving federal funds. He has represented student-athletes at Marshall University, Fresno State, San Diego State, Michigan State, Oregon, and Clemson.

Joshua's representative matters include:

• Cutting-edge work under the Video Privacy Protection Act. Joshua briefed and argued the “consumer” issue to both the Second and Sixth Circuits. In Salazar v. National Basketball Association, the Second Circuit became the first appellate court in the country to address the question. While the district court had required individuals to rent, purchase, or subscribe to audiovisual goods or services to earn “consumer” status, the Second Circuit disagreed. Echoing Joshua’s arguments, the Second Circuit held that the “VPPA’s text, structure, and purpose compel the conclusion” that the relevant statutory phrase “is not limited to audiovisual ‘goods or services.’” Instead, the term “consumer” in the VPPA “should be understood to encompass a renter, purchaser, or subscriber of any of [a video tape service] provider’s ‘goods or services’—audiovisual or not." Read the Second Circuit opinion here. Months later, over a forceful dissent, a majority of the Sixth Circuit disagreed, creating the circuit split Joshua and Bailey Glasser took the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
• Precedent-setting work on the Dormant Commerce Clause. In Foresight v. Chandler, Joshua (along with a Bailey Glasser litigation team) represented a coal producer that sought to enjoin enforcement of Kentucky's SB 257. The law required Kentucky's Public Service Commission to evaluate the reasonableness of regulated utilities’ coal purchases differently based on the producer’s state of origin. The district court denied a preliminary injunction. But the Sixth Circuit agreed the law discriminated in both purpose and effect, meaning it violated the Constitution’s Dormant Commerce Clause.  Read the Court's opinion here. When Kentucky filed a petition for certiorari, the Supreme Court ordered Foresight to respond. And, to drive home why the Sixth Circuit got it right, Joshua turned to a timeless classic: George Orwell’s Animal Farm. Read the brief here. After the Supreme Court denied certiorari, Joshua helped secure permanent relief at the district court, which ultimately declared SB 257 unconstitutional and enjoined its enforcement.
• Critical work protecting student-athletes. In Anders v. California State University, Fresno, a district court denied female student-athletes’ motion for class certification, ultimately holding that athletes had a constitutional right to sport-specific representation. On appeal, Joshua argued there was no such right and that the district court had abused its discretion in denying class certification. The Ninth Circuit agreed, vacating the district court’s order because it was based on a speculative conflict about potential remedies among class members. Read the Ninth Circuit's decision here.
• Sophisticated work concerning computer modeling. Joshua played an integral role on a Bailey Glasser trial team that secured a $32.7 million jury verdict in Ramaco Resources, LLC v. Chubb INA Holdings Inc. The case concerned a denial of insurance coverage for damages after a coal storage silo collapsed in West Virginia. Joshua handled all briefs and also prepared and examined the plaintiff’s metallurgical expert, deftly addressing complicated issues about the use of computer modelling and finite element analyses to predict structural failures—an issue central to the jury’s causation determination.

Joshua is based in Washington, D.C., and licensed in the District of Columbia and Maryland.

Awards & Accolades

Benchmark Litigation, 40 & Under Litigator, Appellate and Commercial, Northeast - Washington, D.C. (2024 - 2026)  

Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers (2025 and 2026)

2026 Lawdragon 500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers 

Best Lawyers Ones to Watch, Appellate Practice and Commercial Litigation, Washington, D.C. (2024)

2024 Lawdragon 500 X – The Next Generation, Commercial Litigation & Appellate

Clerkships

• Law Clerk, Hon. Carlos T. Bea, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2012 - 2013)

Government Service / Previous Employment

• AmeriCorps (2008 - 2009)

Case Studies

Representative Matters

• Successfully briefed and argued a precedent-setting appeal to the Second Circuit regarding the meaning of the term “consumer” in the Video Privacy Protection Act.
• Successfully briefed and argued an appeal to the Ninth Circuit ensuring student-athletes could continue to seek class certification for program-wide Title IX claims.
• Successfully briefed and argued an appeal to the Sixth Circuit concerning the unconstitutionality of Kentucky’s SB 257, which required a state agency to evaluate the reasonableness of utilities’ coal purchases differently based on state of origin in violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause.
• Successfully brief and argued an appeal to the West Virginia Intermediate Court of Appeals protecting summary judgment on statute-of-limitations grounds.
• Successfully briefed and argued an appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court protecting summary judgment regarding the construction of 100-year-old mineral deeds.
• Obtained, as co-trial counsel, a verdict on behalf of Ramaco Resources Inc. of approximately $32.7 million against Chubb-related insurance companies for breach of contract in a denial of insurance coverage case. The trial court subsequently reduced the verdict, but it was substantially reinstated by the Court of Appeals.
• Filed an amicus brief on behalf of a national association of faith-based organizations, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to clarify that, at least in the absence of exceptional circumstances, religiously motivated institutions may not be excluded from otherwise neutral grant programs.

News & Insights