Mathilda’s practice focuses on complex commercial litigation and arbitration across a variety of areas and industries. Mathilda regularly advises clients in all stages of litigation, from pre-litigation counseling and investigation through discovery, dispositive motion practice, trial, and appeals. She has experience taking and defending depositions, arguing motions, and serving as second-chair in a high-profile trial.
For clients in the education sector, Mathilda draws on her academic training in education policy and her broad experience in the industry, including as a former legal intern at the United States Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, an Education Pioneers Fellow, and, prior to law school, an administrator at Columbia University, where she developed university policies and communications. Mathilda has leveraged this experience to advise clients on compliance with federal education laws and aid clients in navigating Title IX investigations on campus, among other ways.
Mathilda also has an active pro bono practice, with a particular focus on immigration issues. In 2017, she helped an immigrant secure release from ICE custody after nearly a year of detention on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court. She has assisted Lawyers for Civil Rights file briefs of amici curiae in seminal cases involving affirmative action and the inclusion of a citizenship question on the U.S. census before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Prior to joining the firm, Mathilda served as a judicial law clerk, first to the Honorable Robert J. Cordy of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, and then to the Honorable Douglas P. Woodlock of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. During law school, Mathilda was editor-in-chief of the Boston College Law Review and a student attorney in the Boston College Legal Assistance Bureau.
Education
- Boston College (JD, magna cum laude)
- Columbia University (MA)
- Oberlin College (BA)
Experience
- Defended an insurance holding company against alleged bad faith claims brought under M.G.L. chs. 93A/176D in connection with its handling and adjusting of a wrongful death claim.
- Represented a limited liability company in complex commercial litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery relating to claims concerning contractual interpretation and fiduciary duties
- Obtained voluntary dismissal of a consumer class action involving unsolicited text messages under the TCPA
- Obtained a favorable arbitration award in California in a dispute over an oral joint venture to open and operate a garment manufacturing facility in China
- Part of a team that obtained complete dismissal of a breach of contract and antitrust complaint in federal district court
Recognition & Awards
- Richard Mintz Pro Bono Award (2019)
- Lawyers for Civil Rights, Pro Bono Award (2016 and 2019)
- Order of the Coif
- McGrath & Kane Award, Boston College Law School (2013)
Involvement
- Member, Boston Bar Association Public Interest Leadership Program, Class of 2019 - 2020
- Gubernatorial Appointee, Metropolitan Area Planning Council (2018 – present)
- Board Member, Apprentice Learning (2016 – 2019)
- At-Large Member, Oberlin College Alumni Leadership Council (2016 – 2019)
- Member, Supreme Judicial Court Law Clerks’ Society Governing Board (2015 - present)
- Member, ONEin3 Advisory Council to Mayor Thomas M. Menino (2013 - 2014)
- Member, Executive Board & Nominations Committee, Oberlin Alumni Association (2011 - 2014)
- Class Trustee, Oberlin College (2007 - 2010)
Recent Insights
Viewpoints
News & Press
An article published by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly reported that a victory secured in federal court by lawyers from Mintz and the American Civil Liberties Union is having a profound effect on the way bond hearings are conducted in deportation cases. The article included commentary from attorneys on the front lines in the Boston immigration court. One lawyer called the ruling a “breath of fresh air” and a “massive change in the law.”
Articles published by Law360 and MassLive reported that Mintz, together with the ACLU of Massachusetts and the ACLU of New Hampshire, achieved a groundbreaking victory for immigrants’ rights when Chief U.S. District Judge Patti B. Saris ruled that the government’s practice of detaining certain immigrants by default violates both due process and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, was filed in June on behalf of immigrants who were jailed due to flawed detention hearings in which the detainee was required to bear the burden of proof as to not being a flight risk or a danger to the community. The latest ruling holds that the class of immigrants are entitled to bond hearings at which the government bears the burden of justifying an immigrant’s detention, and at which the immigration court must consider someone’s ability to pay when setting a bond amount.
The Mintz pro bono team representing the plaintiffs in this case includes Members Susan Finegan and Susan Cohen, Special Counsel Andrew Nathanson, and Associates Mathilda McGee-Tubb, Jennifer Mather McCarthy, and Ryan Dougherty.
The first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, was filed in June on behalf of immigrants who were jailed due to flawed detention hearings in which the detainee was required to bear the burden of proof as to not being a flight risk or a danger to the community. The latest ruling holds that the class of immigrants are entitled to bond hearings at which the government bears the burden of justifying an immigrant’s detention, and at which the immigration court must consider someone’s ability to pay when setting a bond amount.
The Mintz pro bono team representing the plaintiffs in this case includes Members Susan Finegan and Susan Cohen, Special Counsel Andrew Nathanson, and Associates Mathilda McGee-Tubb, Jennifer Mather McCarthy, and Ryan Dougherty.
Viewpoints
Massachusetts SJC Recognizes Limited Affirmative Duty of Universities to Take Suicide Prevention Measures for Known-Risk Students
May 9, 2018 | Blog | By Mathilda McGee-Tubb
On Monday, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a precedential decision in Nguyen v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology et al. (SJC-12329), which addresses the complicated issue of higher education institutions’ responsibility to protect students at risk of suicide.
Read more
Where is the Line? Options for Professional Leagues and Teams Facing On-Field Player Social Activism
February 22, 2018 | Blog | By Mathilda McGee-Tubb
In July 2016, four players on the Minnesota Lynx WNBA team wore black shirts in support of the Black Lives Matter social justice movement. The WNBA fined the players, but later rescinded the fines.
Read more
U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Affirmative Action Program at University of Texas
June 23, 2016 | Blog | By Mathilda McGee-Tubb
On June 23, 2016, in its second time hearing Fisher v. University of Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action admissions program at the University of Texas at Austin. The Court held that the program is lawful under the Equal Protection Clause because it is narrowly tailored to achieving concrete, compelling goals tied to the educational benefits flowing from student body diversity.
Read more
Settlement Agreements with Students Are Protected Student Records But Must Be Disclosed in Redacted Form Under Public Records Law, Says Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
November 30, 2015 | Blog | By Mathilda McGee-Tubb
What is the responsibility of a public educational institution when it receives a public records request for material that it believes it must keep private under state and federal student records laws?
Read more
News & Press
Attorneys: Shift Of Burden Having Profound Impact On Immigration Bond Hearings
January 9, 2020 | Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly
An article published by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly reported that a victory secured in federal court by lawyers from Mintz and the American Civil Liberties Union is having a profound effect on the way bond hearings are conducted in deportation cases. The article included commentary from attorneys on the front lines in the Boston immigration court. One lawyer called the ruling a “breath of fresh air” and a “massive change in the law.”
Law360, MassLive Cover Mintz, ACLU’s Groundbreaking Victory for Immigrants’ Rights
December 2, 2019 | Law360, MassLive
Articles published by Law360 and MassLive reported that Mintz, together with the ACLU of Massachusetts and the ACLU of New Hampshire, achieved a groundbreaking victory for immigrants’ rights when Chief U.S. District Judge Patti B. Saris ruled that the government’s practice of detaining certain immigrants by default violates both due process and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, was filed in June on behalf of immigrants who were jailed due to flawed detention hearings in which the detainee was required to bear the burden of proof as to not being a flight risk or a danger to the community. The latest ruling holds that the class of immigrants are entitled to bond hearings at which the government bears the burden of justifying an immigrant’s detention, and at which the immigration court must consider someone’s ability to pay when setting a bond amount.
The Mintz pro bono team representing the plaintiffs in this case includes Members Susan Finegan and Susan Cohen, Special Counsel Andrew Nathanson, and Associates Mathilda McGee-Tubb, Jennifer Mather McCarthy, and Ryan Dougherty.
The first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, was filed in June on behalf of immigrants who were jailed due to flawed detention hearings in which the detainee was required to bear the burden of proof as to not being a flight risk or a danger to the community. The latest ruling holds that the class of immigrants are entitled to bond hearings at which the government bears the burden of justifying an immigrant’s detention, and at which the immigration court must consider someone’s ability to pay when setting a bond amount.
The Mintz pro bono team representing the plaintiffs in this case includes Members Susan Finegan and Susan Cohen, Special Counsel Andrew Nathanson, and Associates Mathilda McGee-Tubb, Jennifer Mather McCarthy, and Ryan Dougherty.
Federal Judge Rules Detained Immigrants Are Entitled to Fair Hearings
November 27, 2019
Gov't Often Has 'Nothing' To Hold Immigrants, Judge Says
November 6, 2019 | Law360
Law360 covered a summary judgment argument by lawyers from Mintz and the American Civil Liberties Union in a class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, challenging the government’s practice of denying due process to detained immigrants.
Immigration Courts Are 'Ignoring The Law,' Mass. Judge Says
August 6, 2019 | Law360
An article published by Law360 covered a motion hearing in a class action lawsuit, Pereira Brito v. Barr, filed by Mintz, together with the ACLU of Massachusetts and the ACLU of New Hampshire, challenging the government’s practice of denying due process to detained immigrants.
Defending Ill. Biometric Privacy Suits After Rosenbach
March 29, 2019 | Law360
Mintz attorneys, Mathilda McGee-Tubb and Joshua Briones, author this article which addresses the case before the Ninth Circuit, where Facebook contends that a BIPA class action would violate federal due process, because it could result in a huge statutory damages award untethered to any injury, and inconsistent with BIPA’s legislative intent. If Facebook succeeds in this argument, it will open the door to other defendants doing the same.