Skip to content

Bryan P. Tyson

Member
Senior Director, Clark Hill Public Strategies

Bryan P. Tyson is a trial and appellate litigator and election lawyer, focusing on representing governments, candidates, and companies. His extensive experience in trials and appeals gives him a unique perspective to assist clients in navigating complex legal questions.

In addition to his trial and appellate work, Bryan advises states and jurisdictions on the process of redistricting. Representative redistricting clients include the Georgia General Assembly and the Virginia Redistricting Commission during the 2020 cycle of redistricting. Bryan also led the effort to advise on the drawing and then defend Georgia’s redistricting plans following the 2020 Census.

Before returning to private practice in 2018, Bryan served as the Executive Director of the Georgia Public Defender Council, a role that has been described as the managing partner of the largest criminal defense firm in the state. He was appointed to that position by then-Governor Nathan Deal and was responsible for overseeing more than 500 attorney employees, 200 attorneys working under contracts, and 400 staff and investigators in 43 judicial circuits across the state.

Before serving at GPDC, Bryan was an associate at a litigation boutique, where he focused on civil and appellate litigation in state and federal court. With other lawyers in the firm, Bryan advised the Georgia General Assembly during its 2011 redistricting process and assisted in securing federal approval of the redistricting plans adopted by the legislature.

Prior to admission to the bar, he worked in the Georgia General Assembly, most recently with the office of the minority leader of the Georgia House of Representatives. Following his work in the Georgia General Assembly, Bryan served as a policy aide to former Third District Congressman Lynn Westmoreland in Washington, D.C.

Bryan has testified to Congress on proposals to strengthen the Voting Rights Act. Legislative Proposals to Strengthen the Voting Rights Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress.

Education

J.D., magna cum laude, Oak Brook College of Law

Recognitions

  • The Best Lawyers in America®, 2022-2025
  • Georgia Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Indigent Defense Award, 2017
  • Fulton County Daily Report, Attorney of the Year, Finalist, 2015
  • Georgia Super Lawyers, Rising Star, 2011, 2014-2015

Memberships

  • Indigent Defense Committee of the State Bar of Georgia, Member
  • Appellate Practice Section of the State Bar of Georgia, Chair, 2014-2015, Member
  • Governor’s Appellate Jurisdiction Review Commission, 2015
  • Federalist Society, Executive Board Member
  • Emory University Board of Visitors, Member
  • American Enterprise Institute Leadership Network, Member
  • Republican National Lawyers Association, Member
  • The Georgia Resource Center, Inc., Board of Directors

State Bar Licenses

California, Georgia

Court Admissions

California State Courts
Supreme Court of California
Georgia Court of Appeals
Supreme Court of Georgia
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit
U.S. District Ct., C.D. of California
U.S. District Ct., M.D. of Georgia
U.S. District Ct., N.D. of Georgia
  • Al-Bari v. Pigg, No. S25A0177, ___ Ga. ___, 2024 WL 4284250, at *1 (Ga. Sept. 25, 2024) – argued unsuccessfully at Georgia Supreme Court in favor of third-party presidential candidate ballot access claim.
  • Catoosa Cnty. Republican Party v. Henry, No. S24A0917, ___ Ga. ___, 2024 WL 4204629, at *1 (Ga. Sept. 17, 2024) – successfully represented candidate seeking ballot access after local Republican party refused to allow him to qualify.
  • Alpha Phi Alpha v. Raffensperger, Grant v. Raffensperger, Pendergrass v. Raffensperger, __ F. Supp. 3d __, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192080 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 26, 2023) – defended Georgia’s 2021 legislative and congressional district plans in eight-day coordinated trial in three cases (currently on appeal at Eleventh Circuit).
  • Curling v. Raffensperger, 50 F.4th 1114 (11th Cir. 2022) – successfully argued for reversal of injunction entered by district court against State in case involving election administration.
  • Fair Fight Action, Inc. v. Raffensperger, 634 F. Supp. 3d 1128 (N.D. Ga. 2022) – successfully defended State against broad-based challenge to election processes through six-week bench trial.
  • Camp v. Williams, 314 Ga. 699 (2022) – defended voter at the Supreme Court of Georgia on removal of candidate from ballot based on qualification challenge.
  • Rose v. Raffensperger, 619 F.3d 1241 (N.D. Ga. 2022) – defended state in Voting Rights Act trial against method of election of Public Service Commission and trial loss was reversed on appeal sub nom. Rose v. Sec’y of State of Ga., 87 F.4th 469 (11th Cir. 2023); stay pending appeal denied by U.S. Supreme Court at 143 S. Ct. 58 (2022).
  • New Ga. Project v. Raffensperger (In re Ga. Senate Bill 202), 662 F. Supp. 3d 1312 (N.D. Ga. 2022) – defended State against provisions of election law related to providing items of value to voters in line.
  • Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity v. Raffensperger, 587 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (N.D. Ga 2022) – successfully defended redrawn congressional, state House, and state Senate boundaries following 2020 Census against attempted preliminary injunction.
  • United States v. Georgia, 574 F. Supp. 3d 1245 (N.D. Ga. 2021) – defended state election laws against challenge by U.S. Department of Justice
  • Common Cause Ga. v. Sec’y of State of Ga., 17 F.4th 102 (11th Cir. 2021) – defended State in attorney-fee proceeding following preliminary injunction.
  • for Good Governance v. Kemp, 558 F. Supp. 3d 1370 (N.D. Ga. 2021) – defended state against constitutional challenges to state election laws.
  • Black Voters Matter Fund v. Raffensperger, 508 F. Supp. 3d 1283 (N.D. Ga. 2020) – defended State against challenge brought under National Voter Registration Act.
  • New Ga. Project v. Raffensperger, 484 F. Supp. 3d 1265 (N.D. Ga. 2020) stayed by New Ga. Project v. Raffensperger, 976 F.3d 1278 (11th Cir. 2020) – defended multiple counties in challenge to Georgia absentee-ballot processes.
  • Anderson v. Raffensperger, 497 F. Supp. 3d 1300 (N.D. Ga. 2020) – defended county against constitutional claim of long voting lines.
  • Ass’n of Latino Elected Officials, Inc. v. Gwinnett Cty. Bd. of Reg. & Elections, 499 F. Supp. 3d 1231 (N.D. Ga. 2020), aff’d 36 F.4th 1100 (11th Cir. 2022) – defended county against claim under Section 203 of the Voting Rights Act.
  • Gwinnett Cty. NAACP v. Gwinnett Cty. Bd. of Registration & Elections, 446 F. Supp. 3d 1111 (N.D. Ga. 2020) – defended county against attempt to force additional early-voting locations.
  • P.S. ex rel. Short v. Raffensperger, 479 F. Supp. 3d 1340, 1343 (N.D. Ga. 2020) – defended State against constitutional claims about order of candidate names on ballot.
  • Curling v. Raffensperger, 491 F. Supp. 3d 1289 (N.D. Ga. 2020) – defended State in challenge to voting machines.
  • Curling v. Raffensperger, 397 F. Supp. 3d 1334 (N.D. Ga. 2019) – successfully defended State against preliminary injunction seeking to change voting machines.
  • Martin v. Fulton Cty. Bd. of Registration & Elections, 307 Ga. 193 (2019) – represented county at trial and at the Supreme Court of Georgia in election contest for Lt. Governor election based on claims of hacking of voting machines.
  • Democratic Party of Ga., Inc. v. Crittenden, 347 F. Supp. 3d 1324, 1331 (N.D. Ga. 2018) – defended county against claims related to counting of out-of-county provisional ballots.
  • Common Cause Ga. v. Kemp, 347 F. Supp. 3d 1270, 1275 (N.D. Ga. 2018) – defended State against claims related to the voter-registration database.
  • Martin v. Crittenden, 347 F. Supp. 3d 1302, 1304 (N.D. Ga. 2018) – defended county against challenge to Georgia absentee-ballot processes.
  • Georgia State Conf. of the NAACP v. Fayette County Bd. of Comm’rs, 775 F.3d 1336 (11th Cir. 2015) – defended county at-large election system against Voting Rights Act claim.

The Clark Hill approach is equally pragmatic and growth-minded, which is why we understand our clients’ toughest business challenges. Our multidisciplinary, global team of advisors focuses on smart legal solutions, delivered simply.

© 2024 Clark Hill PLC.