David Lazarus

David Lazarus is a partner at Nielsen Merksamer, where he advises clients on the laws governing elections, ballot initiatives, lobbying, ethics, and issue advocacy at the federal, state, and local levels. His clients include businesses, educational institutions, elected officials, trade associations, and non-profits working to achieve political, policy, and business objectives in jurisdictions around the country.

David helps clients navigate the complex regulatory landscape of political and government law with clear, strategic guidance, whether they are engaging in electoral advocacy, grassroots or direct lobbying, public communications, or ballot measure advocacy. David prides himself on serving as a trusted partner to his clients at every step of the lifecycle of a project, from entity formation and strategic planning, to ongoing compliance and dispute resolution and litigation.

• Ballot Initiative and Direct Democracy. David regularly advises on all aspects of the initiative and referendum process, including drafting measures, overseeing petition formatting and circulation, interfacing with public agencies, and litigating at every step of the ballot measure process. He serves as legal counsel and treasurer to numerous political committees, guiding them through a wide variety of state and local campaign reporting and disclosure requirements.

• Campaign Finance and Political Committee Compliance. In addition to regularly forming entities and serving as treasurer, David has deep experience advising PACs, Super PACs, and hybrid entities. He regularly counsels political committees, independent expenditure groups, and advocacy organizations on campaign finance rules, coordination restrictions, disclosure obligations, and enforcement risks at the federal, state, and local levels. 

• Government Ethics and Public Official Compliance. David advises elected officials, agencies, candidates, and others on financial disclosure, conflicts of interest, gift and travel restrictions, post-employment rules, and the Foreign Agents Registration Act. He also helps clients develop internal compliance protocols and respond to investigations or inquiries from oversight bodies. 

• Lobbying and Pay-to-Play Compliance. David guides clients through lobbying registration, reporting, and gift laws—helping organizations manage compliance in jurisdictions across the country. For companies and individuals that do business with public agencies, David has extensive experience advising on political law issues related to procurement, including pay-to-play laws, gift and ethics restrictions, and campaign contribution restrictions that apply to vendors, bidders, and their principals. 

• Enforcement Defense and Litigation. David regularly obtains favorable outcomes for clients in government-facing litigation at the state, local, and federal levels and in ethics investigations and proceedings. He has litigated a wide range of direct democracy cases, successfully defending measures against constitutional challenges and ensuring governments comply with their legal obligations. He also represents clients in investigations and enforcement actions before ethics commissions, campaign finance regulators, and other agencies.

David received his J.D., with pro bono distinction, from Stanford Law School in 2014 and his B.A. from the University of Wisconsin in 2004. Prior to entering private practice, he served in all three branches of the federal government: as a law clerk to Judge Michael Daly Hawkins on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; as a Senior Advisor at the U.S. Department of Agriculture under Secretary Tom Vilsack; and as a Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Richard Durbin. He also served on President Obama’s Presidential Transition Team.

• Coalition for Richmond’s Future v. Pamela Christian, Case No. N24-1181 (Contra Costa Super. Ct. 2024): obtained successful result in pre-election litigation striking misleading and biased portions of a ballot label on a local measure in violation of California Elections Code requirements.
• Ashoke Talukdar v. Shirley N. Weber, Case No. 24WM00018 (Sacramento County Super. Ct. 2024): on behalf of Real Parties in Interest, obtained complete defense verdict against multiple claims that the ballot arguments in favor of Prop. 34 (2024) were false or misleading.
• Castellanos v. State of California (2024) 16 Cal.5th 588: co-counsel on successful defense of the Protect App Based Driver’s Act, Prop. 22 (2020), against claims that it interfered with the Legislature’s “plenary” power over workers compensation per Cal. Const. art. XIV, § 2 and violated Cal. Const. art. II, § 8(d), the single-subject rule.
• AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. Shirley N. Weber, Case No. S285602 (Cal. Sup. Ct.) and multiple other proceedings: on behalf of Real Parties in Interest, successful defense of multiple pre-election lawsuits attempting to remove the Protect Patients Now Act, Prop. 34 (2024), from the ballot on various state and federal constitutional grounds.
• California Chamber of Commerce v. California Privacy Protection Agency, Case No. 34-2023-80004106 (Sacramento County Super. Ct. 2023): obtained writ of mandate prohibiting state agency from its effort to disregard one year period between adoption of regulations under Prop. 24 (2020) and enforcement of those regulations pursuant to the phased implementation and enforcement plan adopted by the voters; although reversed in part by Court of Appeal (California Privacy Protection Agency v. Sup. Ct. (2024) 99 Cal. App. 5th 705), the one-year stay of enforcement was secured.
• Save Local Restaurants v. Hagen, Case No. 34-2022-80004062 (Sacramento County Super. Ct. 2023): on behalf of statewide referendum proponents, obtained TRO and injunction prohibiting state agency and others from enforcing referred law during the petition signature verification process and, if/when the referendum qualified for the ballot, unless the challenged statute is approved by the voters at a statewide election.
• Viola v. Caruso Management Co. LTD, Case No. B323596 (Cal. Ct. App., 2d Dist., Oct. 2023): co-counsel in successful defense of claims against shopping center owner aimed at expanding Pruneyard v. Robins to require public access for First Amendment activities beyond the center’s reasonable time, place, and manner policies based on mall owner’s own use of the property.
• Bonnyview Bechelli Coalition v. City of Redding, Case No. C095557 (Cal. Ct. App., 3d Dist., Aug. 2022): successfully defended initiative to approve new regional commercial retail center in City of Redding against California constitutional claims, including Cal. Const. art. II, § 12 (naming a private entity to have a power, function, or duty) and Cal. Const. art. II, § 8(d) (single subject).
• Agenbroad v. Padilla, Case No. 34-2020-80003542 (Sacramento County Super. Ct. 2020): on behalf of referendum proponents and small business owners, obtained relief confirming that filing a statewide referendum petition with sufficient signatures prima facie immediately triggers suspension of the challenged statute unless and until it fails to qualify or is approved by the voters at a statewide election.