Blog
See All Judicial Nominees
Brian Charles Lea
Confirmed Trump 2.0
Confirmed to the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
On November 14, 2025, President Trump nominated Brian Charles Lea to the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. He was confirmed on February 5, 2026.
View/download the fact sheet here.
Biography
Born in Montreal, Canada, in 1983, Brian Lea studied at Christian Brothers University (2002–2004) before earning his B.A. from Union University in 2006. He then earned his J.D. from the University of Georgia in 2009.
Legal Experience
Lea worked as a summer associate at three firms: Davis, Pickren, Seydel & Sneed (2007); DLA Piper (2008); and Smith, Gambrell & Russell (2008). He then clerked for Judge Edward Carnes on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (2009–2010) before rejoining DLA Piper as an associate (2010–2011). After clerking for Justice Clarence Thomas on the U.S. Supreme Court (2011–2012), Lea joined Jones Day as an associate (2012–2014).
Lea next joined his alma mater, the University of Georgia School of Law, as a Visiting Assistant Professor (2015–2017), before returning to Jones Day, where he served as an associate (2017–2019) and later as a partner (2020–2025). Lea now serves as the Deputy Associate Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice (2025–present).
Key Facts
Professional & Legal Associations
Bleckley American Inn of Court—Master (2022–Present), Barrister (2018–2020); American Law Institute (2020–Present); Election Litigation MCG (2023–Present); Torts: Remedies MCG (2020–Present); Atlanta Bar Association (2014–2015, 2019–2020, 2023–2025); Cobb County Bar (2021–2025); Federal Bar Association (2018–2020); Federalist Society (2017–2018, 2022–Present); Supreme Court Historical Society (2015–Present); Lumpkin Inn of Court—Barrister (2013–2015); American Bar Association (2009–2011); Order of the Coif (2009); American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics (2008–2010).
Education & Academic Honors
Georgia Law Review (2007–2009): Editorial Board (2007–2008), Managing Board/Articles Editor (2008–2009); Academic & Athletic Scholarships—Union University (2004–2006), Christian Brothers University (2002–2004).
Church Memberships
St. John the Beloved, VA (2025–Present); Holy Family, GA (2018–2025); Eleventh Circuit Historical Society (2014–2025); St. Thomas the Apostle (2017–2018); St. Lawrence (2015–2017); Sacred Heart Basilica (2012–2015); St. Peter’s, DC (2011–2012); Cathedral of Christ the King (2010–2011); Church of the Holy Spirit, AL (2009–2010); Una Voce, Central Alabama (2009–2010).
- Represented Senator Graham, sought stay and injunction pending an appeal of the denial of a motion to quash a witness subpoena issued by the Fulton County Special Purpose Grand Jury. Senator Lindsey Graham v. Fulton County Special Purpose Grand Jury, No. 22A337 (Oct. 21, 2022)
- Represented religious employers, including the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta, and the Archbishop of Atlanta, who challenged regulations mandating contraceptive coverage in employee health insurance plans. The district court granted an injunction of the regulation, which was reversed by an Eleventh Circuit panel. Eternal Word Television Network, Inc. v. Secy, US. Dep’t of Health & Human Services, 818 F.3d 1122 (11th Cir. 2016); Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta v. Sebelius, 2014 WL 2441742 (N.D. Ga. 2014); Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta v. Sebelius, 2014 WL 1256373 (N.D. Ga. 2014) (Judge William Duffey) (2012-2014)
- Represented Trump Administration-led National Institutes of Health (NIH) when it issued guidance that tried to cap cost reimbursements for federal research grants – a cap that would unlawfully harm research institutions and could harm important medical research. Nearly two dozen state attorneys general challenged the guidance. The district court issued a permanent injunction against the Trump guidance, which is currently pending on appeal. Massachusetts v. National Institutes of Health, 2025 WL 1063760 (D. Mass. 2025),pending on appeal in Nos. 25-1343, 25-1344, 25-1345 (1st Cir.); Massachusetts v. National Institutes of Health, 770 F. Supp. 3d 277 (D. Mass. 2025) (Judge Angel Kelley) (2025 – present)
- Represented R.J. Reynolds when it tried to deny damages to a smoker’s same sex widower based on a discriminatory anti-LGBTQ+ legal theory. Bryan Rintoul’s longtime partner and eventual husband Edward Caprio was diagnosed with smoking-caused lung disease in 1996. Caprio died in 2018. Under Florida state law, damages for loss of consortium and pain and suffering are only available to a spouse if they had been married at the time of diagnosis—but Florida law also didn’t allow same-sex couples to marry in 1996 (when Caprio was diagnosed). Applying such laws would have denied Rintoul a legal right of marriage in violation of Obergefell v. Hodges. RJ Reynolds argued that Florida law didn’t violate Obergefell because Rintoul and Caprio never actually applied for a license and never experienced an unconstitutional rejection before Caprio’s 1996 diagnosis. This argument flies in the face of Obergefell and punishes same-sex couples for the discrimination they faced before that landmark case. Rintoul v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 2024 WL 3735894 (Fla. 2024); Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Rintoul, 395 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024); Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Rintoul, 342 So. 3d 656 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (2020 – 2024)
- Helped R.J. Reynolds evade accountability following the reversal of a $23.6 billion judgment for the harm caused by the Big Tobacco company. Lea assisted in developing and prepping the case strategy in advance of a retrial, defended the Big Tobacco company in appellate proceedings, and convinced the appellate court to affirm the reversal of the judgment and the Florida Supreme Court to deny a review. Robinson v. R.J Reynolds Tobacco Company, 2022 WL 15627276 (Fla. 2022); Robinson v. R.J Reynolds Tobacco Company, 324 So. 3d 1287 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021); Robinson v. R.J Reynolds Tobacco Company, No. ID19-2893 (Fla. 1st Cir.) (2019 – 2022)
- Stripped a nearly $7 million dollar damages award from a grieving widow, even after the tobacco company was found to have been liable. By arguing vigorously to reducepunitive damages before a conservative state supreme court, Lea helped further undermine corporate accountability and the strong message intended for Big Tobacco. Sheffields. R.JReynolds Tobacco Company, 329 So. 3d 114 (Fla. 2021); R.J Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Sheffield, 266 So. 3d 1230 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (2017 – 2021).