Ryan Y. Park

From 2021 to 2023, Park represented the University of North Carolina in a constitutional challenge to its race-conscious admissions policy. The plaintiff argued that the university’s consideration of race in its holistic admissions process violated the Equal Protection Clause. After a bench trial, the district court ruled that the university’s policy complied with Supreme Court precedent. The plaintiff then sought direct review in the Supreme Court, which granted the petition and ultimately reversed the decision, finding the university’s use of race did not meet the strict scrutiny standard under the Equal Protection Clause. In the trial court, Park assisted with briefing pre- and post-trial motions. On appeal, Park led the legal team in briefing the case for the Supreme Court and presented oral arguments. Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Park collaborated closely with the university to ensure its admissions process fully complied with the Court’s ruling.

No. 23-2040 (4th Cir.) (pending) (Diaz, C.J., Niemeyer, Richardson, JJ.).

Since 2023, Park has represented the attorney general and several district attorneys in a constitutional challenge to North Carolina’s sex-offender registration law. The law requires individuals convicted of certain sex crimes to register with the state and imposes restrictions on their activities and access to locations like schools and playgrounds. Plaintiffs, consisting of two nonprofit groups and individual sex offenders, claimed that the registration statute is punitive and cannot be applied retroactively under the Ex Post Facto Clause. After a bench trial, a federal district court upheld the statute’s constitutionality, rejecting the plaintiffs’ claims. On appeal, the state defendants are arguing that the registry is neither punitive in intent nor effect and can be retroactively applied to sex offenders convicted before the statute or relevant amendments were enacted. The appeal is currently pending in the Fourth Circuit. Park serves as lead counsel for the state, leading the briefing team and presenting the case in court.

383 N.C. 464 (2022) (Newby, C.J. & Hudson, Ervin, Morgan, Earls, Berger, Barringer, JJ.). 

From 2021 to 2022, Park represented the state in a criminal case involving convictions for first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder in Durham, North Carolina. The trial evidence demonstrated that the defendant intentionally lured his neighbor outside and fatally stabbed him then attempted to murder the neighbor’s wife and baby. On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court erred by allowing testimony from the investigating officer, who stated that the wife’s account of the events was “rock solid, never wavered, never changed.” The defendant claimed this was improper vouching for the witness’s credibility. The North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the testimony, noting that the officer commented on the witness’s consistency rather than the truthfulness of her statements, and it ruled that any error was not prejudicial.

The North Carolina Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, found the testimony to be improper vouching. However, the court unanimously affirmed the convictions, concluding that the error was not prejudicial and did not affect the jury’s guilty verdict. At the state court of appeals, Park collaborated with co-counsel on the briefs. At the North Carolina Supreme Court, Park served as the sole counsel for the state, drafting the briefs and arguing the case.