Above the Law - Thinking Like a Lawyer

The hosts dive into the million-dollar sanctions upheld against Trump and his questionable legal team. There’s chatter about a major firm's overhaul of its summer associate program, shortening it due to recruiting chaos. They also explore the quirky debate between Wawa and Sheetz while sharing Thanksgiving food tips. In a surprising twist, they highlight the legal troubles of phony U.S. attorneys and the implications of interim appointment limits. It’s a mix of legal drama, food fun, and recruitment woes!

Bonus season is heating up, with Biglaw firms set to hand out rewards that mirror last year’s figures. A debate unfolds over the best Thanksgiving sides, transitioning into dissecting legal headlines. Lindsey Halligan’s blunders in the Comey case highlight the risks of inexperienced prosecution. Judge Jerry Smith's controversial dissent on Texas redistricting raises eyebrows, blending conspiracy theories with judicial discourse. The hosts explore the economic implications of bonuses amidst a shaky market, questioning the future of pay structures.

What would a good legal dominatrix name be? A recent racist rant leads to the firing of a recruiting director, sparking conversations about hidden biases in law firms. Legal squabbles highlight the importance of document management, while allegations of a lawyer misusing firm phones for dominatrix chats add a scandalous twist. Meanwhile, a gala protest against Paul Weiss unfolds, showcasing the reputational risks firms face in today’s climate. It’s a mix of humor, controversy, and legal insights!

Kirkland's training on politeness for lawyers in private equity reveals how corporate clients have become sensitive. The Federalist Society's panel boldly demands the impeachment of judges for not aligning with the Trump administration's agenda. A critique emerges over the conservative legal movement's use of the shadow docket to challenge legal norms. The trial involving a sandwich thrower ends in an unexpected not guilty verdict, punctuated by questionable prosecutorial tactics. The hosts also dive into lighthearted political memes and current events.

The discussion revolves around DOJ lawyers facing suspension for labeling January 6 a riot in a memo, igniting a debate on the role of pardons. There's speculation on whether AI will finally disrupt the traditional billable hour, pushing firms to explore alternative fee structures. The implications of new DOE rulemaking threaten public service loan forgiveness, raising concerns about the future of public interest work. The hosts examine how this may deter recruits and affect smaller organizations dedicated to advocacy.

This discussion dives into the ethical dilemmas faced by conservative lawyers confronting the Trump era's impact on the rule of law. Judge Michael Luttig delivers a passionate critique of the Supreme Court, calling for urgent action. The fallout from a lawyer's viral rant at a baseball game raises questions about professional conduct. Additionally, a major law firm is at a crossroads, seeking merger partners amid significant leadership changes. Finally, the panel debates the balance between resisting current abuses and preparing for a post-crisis legal landscape.

Also frivolous lawsuits and the insidiousness of dishonest analysis. ----- Appeals court decides that some things are best left unsaid. And among those things are calling your judge the c-word. Just so we're clear, even though this was over Zoom, we're not talking about "cat." After trying to bully Michigan Law Review through litigation, the anti-DEI publicity hounds at FASORP have dropped the case. And with Trump inching closer to declaring martial law in America's cities, right-leaning legal analysts have started the process of normalizing abuse of the Insurrection Act by pretending its strict limits are really just open-ended invitations and if anyone's to blame for Donald Trump's authoritarianism, it's really Joe Biden. We manage to talk about AI and Baudrillard in a single episode.

Just in time for the AI slop to take over. ----- Some law firms are handing out recruiting entertainment budgets to law students. While we don't fault law students some sweet walking around money, placing that power in the hands of students highlights the breakdown in the law school recruiting process and a real risk of baking more bias into hiring. Why has Kirkland memory holes its incoming partner class? The decision to opt out of its traditional announcement message seems like a move to shield its high-achievers, but there are some other possibilities. And a Senator wants some answers after a pair of federal judges issue opinions with possible (read: likely) AI hallucinations.

One can only hope. ----- For a long time, the bar exam seemed like the nasty habit that the legal profession just couldn't quit. But there's finally some progress on that front, with Utah unveiling a new alternative pathway to licensure that values experience and the skills that an actual practitioner needs. We also check in on Cadwalader, where the firm brings on a new co-manager while taking some serious blows in the lateral market. Finally, the Supreme Court is back in session, so we look back at the summer of shadows, when the Court's shadow docket finally crashed into the reality of a president unwilling to play the game and Justice Thomas shed a little light on his decision to bail on teaching his class after Dobbs.

Biglaw capitulators face new challenge and James Comey gets indicted. ----- Perennially embattled Cooley Law School once again called out by the ABA over sagging bar passage rates. The school has been out of compliance with ABA standards since 2020, and now finds itself on probation with its accreditor. The last time something like this happened, Cooley sued the ABA into relenting. History is a flat circle. After learning that Paul Weiss and Kirkland were providing free legal services to the Commerce Department, presumably in an effort to satisfy their pro bono payola obligations, we wondered how this could possibly be legal in light of 31 U.S.C. 1342. Apparently, lawmakers wondered the same thing. And James Comey finds himself indicted after a whirlwind that involved removing the existing top federal prosecutor for refusing to file a sham case and replacing him with an in-over-her-head Florida insurance lawyer.