This article highlighting the background and traits of a qualified whistleblower lawyer is sent as part of NWC’s “Sunday Read” series. For more information like this, please join our mailing list.

National Whistleblower Center (NWC) launched the “Getting to Know Whistleblower Attorneys” feature to explore the qualities and motivations of some of the field’s leading practitioners.

Leading the next generation of whistleblower law is Max E. Rodriguez, who began his legal career clerking for the Honorable Denise J. Casper of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts and the Honorable O. Rogeriee Thompson of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Following those clerkships, Rodriguez practiced at two litigation boutiques where he represented individuals and entities in whistleblower, complex litigation, class action, and appellate matters.

He launched the Law Office of Max Rodriguez in 2024 and has since secured substantial settlements and resolutions in whistleblower matters involving False Claims Act/Qui Tam, healthcare fraud, and environmental claims. Furthermore, legal media has taken notice of his impact, with the New York-based advocate named to LawDragon 500 Leading Civil Rights & Plaintiff Employment Lawyers list in 2025, and a recognized Rising Star by SuperLawyers.

In this Sunday Read, NWC learns what inspired Rodriguez to fight for whistleblowers and the philosophies that drive his advocacy.

An Interview with Max E. Rodriguez

Your firm emphasizes working with clients who want to “make a difference for the public good.” How did your own path lead you to focus on whistleblower and defamation cases, and when did you realize this was the work you wanted to build your career around?

I’ve always been driven by the desire to do the right thing and, when faced with any situation, ask myself whether what I’m doing is going make the world, in my view, better or worse.

If I’m not making the world better, then I feel my actions are not worthwhile. When I’ve had jobs where that was not the analysis in deciding what kind of work to do or how to do it, I always felt misaligned and out of place, like something was wrong with me. Falling into the practice areas I have is the best way I have found to apply those fundamental personal principles in my career.

By helping whistleblowers, I empower them to speak up, and hopefully help them to feel validated in what they saw and experienced. But I also get to fight for accountability; wrongdoers — all too often people and organizations with outsized power and influence — need to understand the consequences of what they have done. In defamation matters, I get to argue for what is “true.” That truth may be pursued in representing a plaintiff who has been harmed by maliciously published falsehoods. That truth may be pursued in helping a defendant hopefully get dismissal (and maybe anti-SLAPP fees) when a frivolous lawsuit has been filed against them for merely speaking their truth.

What do you love about representing and collaborating with whistleblowers?

Whistleblowers are the bravest people I know. They have an internal moral compass that tells them something they’re seeing is wrong, and they listen to that voice. Not everyone does. They then are willing to object, to speak out, or even if they don’t, to consult with an attorney and figure out what they are comfortable doing.

They are willing to walk into a room of government officials and tell them what they saw, and stand firmly planted in their truth to say it was wrong, and why. And far too often, they can face professional and personal challenges for taking those brave steps, trusting in the law and their zealous advocates to right the wrongs committed against them. It’s an honor to help them tell their stories, navigate what can be very complex processes, and stand up for what we believe is right.

Whistleblowers frequently raise concerns internally before seeking counsel. From your perspective, what do lawyers, business leaders, and the public most often misunderstand about what whistleblowers are actually going through at that stage?

This is exactly right; 9.9 times out of 10, a whistleblower would like nothing more than to feel that an organization has heard their concerns, taken them seriously, and if something is wrong, to correct it. Very few people are looking to blow things up or create confrontation where none is necessary. But many, when raising those internal concerns, learn that they are misaligned. The organization, and those in power within it, do not share their concerns, do not want to right a wrong if they don’t feel they need to, and sometimes are even willing to threaten or punish the people who raise those concerns at all. Even in milder situations, they refuse to involve whistleblowers in the process of internal investigation and treat them like real stakeholders. They are treated like a nuisance.

This is why external reporting mechanisms are so important. Institutions all too often fail to take their own stakeholders seriously, and fail to prioritize complying with the law above profit or power.

Your practice spans whistleblower matters, defamation disputes, and other cases for people and businesses that have experienced mistreatment. What common themes do you see across these different types of cases, and how do they shape the way you think about accountability and justice?

The common themes I see are that people with some combination of power, money, and narcissism feel confident they can get away with something: taking from taxpayers or customers, screwing over competitors, firing whistleblowers for speaking up, and so on. In defamation, similar principles apply.

Even in representing defendants, sometimes a plaintiff who has filed a frivolous defamation complaint is clearly confident they will never be held responsible for having upended a person’s life by suing them over legal and constitutionally protected speech.

I see my job as advising my clients how to navigate an experience and a process that has that quality, and advocate on their behalf to get the best and most just result.

***

NWC thanks Max Rodriguez for his fascinating insight. We will learn more about his work handling environmental law claims and his perspective on the evolving whistleblower landscape in an upcoming installment of Sunday Read. Join NWC’s mailing list, subscribe to the newsletter on LinkedIn, and follow NWC on Medium to receive notifications for Part 2!

Get to know other whistleblower attorneys, such as:

• Dean A. Zerbe
• Mychal Wilson, Esq.
• Jacey Messer, Esq.
• John McKnight
• Will Kramer
• María de los Ángeles Estrada
• Vivek Kothari

Resources For Whistleblowers

The decision to come forward is not one to be taken lightly, nor should selecting a whistleblower lawyer. NWC provides resources that can connect you with the right legal professional.

Neither the NWC nor the Whistleblower Legal Defense and Education Fund can provide legal advice as part of the LAP intake process. Always remember an attorney does NOT represent you until and unless you have a signed written representation agreement with an attorney.

Fill out the secure intake form.

You can also learn more about the type of whistleblower lawyer needed for your claim in Rules for Whistleblowers: A Handbook for Doing What’s Right, written by NWC Founder and Chairman of the Board Stephen M. Kohn.

Support NWC

NWC works tirelessly to strengthen whistleblower programs and educate the public about their value. As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, our work relies on donors like you.

💙 Donate today to help us continue advocating for whistleblowers.

🎁 Special Offers: Donors of $50 or more will receive a free copy of Rules For Whistleblowers: A Handbook For Doing What’s Right.

🎁 Donors of $100+ will receive Rules For Whistleblowers and an exclusive NWC t-shirt.

This story was written by Justin Smulison, a professional writer, podcaster, and event host based in New York.