Strategies For Stepping Into Your Greatest Personal And Professional Self – Above the Law

A
new
year
means
fresh
starts,
new
goals,
and
new
objectives,
personally
and
professionally.
As
you
reflect
on
the
past
year,
you
might
have
already
made
a
list
of
ways
you
intend
to
drive
your
personal
growth
over
the
next
12
months.
Stepping
into
your
greatest
personal
and
professional
self
is
about
self-reflection,
self-improvement,
mindset
mastery,
and
re-alignment.
It’s
also
about
shedding
the
habits,
people,
and
things
that
no
longer
align.
Here
are
some
strategies
to
help
you
get
started
and
put
the
wheels
into
motion.


Determining
What
You
Want

A
key
process
of
self-discovery
is
aligning
your
goals
and
objectives
with
what
matters
most
to
you.
It’s
important
to
determine
what
you
want,
but
also
need.
You
must
be
radically
honest
when
asking
yourself,
“Where
do
I
want
to
go
and
what
do
I
need
to
get
there?”
When
I
first
meet
with
a
client,
I
ask
the
question,
“What
are
you
looking
to
get
out
of
that
next
chapter
of
your
career?”
I
then
ask
what
they
need
personally
in
that
next
chapter
to
become
the
best
version
of
themselves. 

The
personal
piece
is
the
hardest
for
many
to
answer
as
mental,
physical,
and
emotional
needs
can
affect
our
professional
direction.
The
answer
will
change
during
different
decades
and
seasons
of
one’s
life.
In
one
season,
you
might
coast
through
your
work
day-to-day.
In
another,
you’ll
realize
you
want
and
need
more
from
your
career,
which
puts
you
in
a
place
of
feeling
stagnant
or
uninspired.
And,
maybe
in
the
next
season,
you’ll
experience
an
identity
shift
from
what
you
need
personally
in
your
life
or
a
new
way
of
operating

perhaps
a
deeper
focus
on
family
time,
travel,
or
health.

Like
many
of
my
executive
clients,
reaching
the
pinnacle
of

success
in
your
career

(whether
as
a

general
counsel
,
law
firm
partner,
or
C-suite
executive)
is
often
matched
with
the
statement,
“Okay,
but
now
what?
What’s
next
for
me?”
If
you’re
feeling
stuck,
here
are
some
questions
that
can
help
you
identify
some
blind
spots
and
remove
those
roadblocks:

  • Does
    your
    work
    align
    with
    your
    current
    values?
  • What’s
    hindering
    you
    from
    beginning
    that
    next
    chapter?
    Is
    it
    fear
    or
    comfort
    that’s
    driving
    you? 
  • Do
    you
    feel
    challenged
    more
    than
    you
    feel
    depleted?
  • What
    do
    you
    want
    to
    be
    in
    the
    next
    year?
    Three
    years?
    Five
    years?
    Ten
    years?
  • What
    does
    that
    next
    level
    actually
    require
    of
    you?


Developing
Clear
Boundaries

Success
requires
diligence
in

setting
boundaries

to
prevent
derailment
from
your
goals.
As
a
personal
example,
my
own
health
has
undertaken
a
major
transformation
over
these
past
five
(5)
years.
After
working
100-plus
hour
weeks
consistently
for
decades,
I
hit
a
rock-bottom
moment
in
my
physical
and
mental
health
at
the
end
of
2021.

If
the

pandemic
taught
us
anything
,
it’s
that
shifts
and
pivots
happen
when
we
least
expect
it,
but
it’s
how
we
move
through
crisis
and
change
that
really
defines
us.
For
me,
that
change
was

overcoming
burnout
,
tending
to
my
own
self-care,
and
being
consistent
with
my
health
needs.
I
made
a
lot
of
excuses
about
my
workload
taking
priority.
I
was
excelling
in
my
business
and
professionally
at
extraordinary
levels.
To
my
detriment,
it
resulted
in
putting
my
own
needs
on
the
backburner

frequently
canceled
or
postponed
doctors’
appointments,
forgetfulness
in
taking
my
thyroid
medication,
losing
hair,
not
sleeping
properly,
and
the
list
goes
on. 

At
the
beginning
of
2022,
I
remember
watching
a
playback
of
a
presentation
I
did,
and
realized
I
didn’t
look
well
at
all

my
eye
was
twitching
uncontrollably,
and
I
could
see
the
inflammation
and
puffiness
in
my
face.
It
was
clear
I
was
compromising
my
health
and
needed
to
act
immediately.
While
it’s
great
to
be
booked
and
busy,
you
can’t
continue
working
at
that
pace
and
maintain
consistently
good
levels
of
energy
and
overall
health. 

I
share
this
personal
anecdote
with
my
clients
quite
often
because
being
a
high-performer
and
high-achiever
comes
with
immense
self-discipline
and
drive,
as
well
as
deep
precision
and
execution.
We
bring
a
relentless
desire
to
be
1%
better
daily,
But
it
also
brings
a
downside

an
inability
to
turn
off
your
brain,
plaguing
anxiety
over
not
doing
enough,
fear
of
failure,
and
the
pressure
to
always
“be
on.”
Unchecked
overperformance
erodes
our
presence
and
clear
decision-making.


Tend
To
Your
Own
Self-Care

I
often
ask
my
clients
what
they’re
doing
to
be
their
personal
best
in
terms
of
self-care.
It’s
something
that
catches
them
off-guard
because
they
expect
my
questions
to
be
career-centric.
When
you’re
on
an
airplane,
the
airline
steward
always
says,
“Put

your

mask
on
first.”
There’s
a
reason
for
that.
Before
you
can
care
for
anyone
else
or
anything
else,
you
have
to
tend
to
your
own
self-care.
It’s
about
being
strategically
responsible
as
the
leader
of
your
own
life.

In
my
20s,
30s,
and
early
40s,
I
was
able
to
traverse
across
my
days,
weeks,
and
months
with
very
little
sleep.
Now,
in
my
late
40s,
I’ve
got
a
stringent
schedule
and
routine
I
stick
to
with
very
little
derailment,
along
with
a
structured
exercise
regimen.
My
body
craves
that
rest,
but
it
also
needs
good
nutrition
and
daily
movement
to
function
optimally.
Daily
walks
(I’m
a
big
proponent
of
10,000
steps
a
day)
help
me
to
clear
my
mind,
decompress
from
the
cerebral
parts
of
my
workday,
and
create
that
necessary
self-care. 

My
2022
wake-up
call
was
much-needed,
and
I’ve
since
reaped
the
benefits
of
it
physically,
mentally,
and
emotionally.
If
you’re
teetering
on
your
own
version
of
burnout
due
to
a
diminished
focus
on
your
health,
I
hope
this
article
inspires
you
to
act
(and
reach
out
if
you
need
some
motivational
tips!).

In
this
new
year,
be
sure
to

develop
a
framework

that’s
not
only
realistic
and
practical,
but
also
action-driven
and
focused
on
the
tools
needed
to
achieve
those
goals.
Remember,
your
greatest
personal
and
professional
self
is
achieved
by
doing
what
aligns
with
your
own
value
system
and
needs.




Wendi
Weiner
is
an attorney,
career
expert,
and
founder
of The
Writing
Guru
,
an
award-winning
executive
resume
writing
services
company.
Wendi creates
powerful
career
and
personal
brands
for
attorneys,
executives,
and
C-suite/Board
leaders
for
their
job
search
and
digital
footprint. She
also
writes
for
major
publications
about
alternative
careers
for
lawyers, personal
branding,
LinkedIn
storytelling,
career
strategy,
and
the
job
search
process. You
can
reach
her
by
email
at [email protected],
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn,
and
follow
her
on
Twitter @thewritingguru.

Former Biglaw Partner Calls Out Trump’s ‘Palpable’ ‘Dementia’ And ‘Cognitive Decline’ – Above the Law

Ty
Cobb

Former
Hogan
&
Lovells
partner
turned White
House
 special
counsel
(in
the
Trump
I
regime) Ty
Cobb
 is
back
on
the

cable
news
circuit

to
make
some

biting
comments

about
his
former
boss.
Cobb
left
the
hallowed
halls
of
Biglaw
to
join
the
first
Trump
administration,
but
he quickly
left. 
Since
then,
he’s
taken
to
the
airwave
with
his
signature
facial
hair
with
folksy way
of cutting
through 
the right-wing
BS
.


Cobb
told

Ari
Melber
on
MS
NOW’s The
Beat

last
night,
that
it’s
pretty
obvious
that
Donald
Trump
has,
erm,
lost
the
plot.
Commenting
on
a

recent
Trump
interview

that
went
on
for
two
hours
and
struggled
to
remain
on
point.
“I
don’t
think
there’s
anybody
outside
of
the
United
States
who
believes
that
Trump
is
sane,”
said
Cobb.

It’s
pretty
clear
Cob
thinks
this
is
a
new,
and
scary,
development,
because
Melber
asked,
“Since
you’ve
worked
for
him
in
the
White
House,
when
you
make
that
reference
to
‘sane,’
do
you
mean
problems
with
how
he
approaches
things
that
have
long
been
there,
or
are
you
referring
to
some
decline?”

And
Cobb
responded,
“No,
I
think
there’s
been
a
significant
decline.
He’s
always
been
driven
by
narcissism.
But
I
think
the
dementia
and
the
cognitive
decline
are
palpable,
as
do
many
experts,
including
many
physicians.”

Lots
of
people
have
made
similar
comments
about
Trump’s
mental
well-being,
but
Cobb’s
remarks
struck
a
nerve
in
MAGAland,
with
White
House
Communications
Director
Steven
Cheung
telling
the
Daily
Beast,
“Ty
Cobb
is
an
eternal
stain
on
the
great
name
he
shares
with
a
baseball
legend.
He
should
change
his
name
to
Ty
Loser.”
…Which
only
makes
it
more
likely
Cobb
will
wind
up
back
on
TV
to
get
under
the
collective
skin
of
the
administration.




Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast
,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her

with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1
 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

LexisNexis Unveils Oodles Of Legal AI Workflows – Above the Law

This
morning,
LexisNexis
announced
the
commercial
preview
of
Protégé
AI
Workflows,
the
inevitable
next
shoe
to
drop
in
the
company’s
AI
push.
As
every
industry
searches
for
applications
that
can
turn
AI
from
a
novelty
into
productivity,
momentum
has
swung
toward
automation
and
building
“agents”
to
tackle
mundane
(or
not-so-mundane,
as
the
case
may
be)
workflows.
In
that
spirit,
LexisNexis
has
hundreds
of
pre-built
legal
automation
tools
paired
with
a
custom
workflow
builder
intended
to
streamline
everything
from
drafting
motions
to
redlining
contracts
against
firm
playbooks.

If
the

2025
legal
tech
word
of
the
year
was
“agents,”

it’s
telling
that
this
2026
LexisNexis
rollout
tamps
down
a
bit
on
that
energy.
While
not
eschewing
the
term
entirely,
the
company
puts
more
emphasis
on
more
familiar

and
more
trusted

terms
like
“automated
workflows.”
At
one
point,
even
describing
the
tasks
that
tech
investors
would
call
agentic
as
“a
teammate,”
a
word

I’ve
championed
for
legal
tech
specifically
.
For
a
lawyer,
agency
means
hiring
someone
to
act
in
your
stead
and
take
10
percent
leaving
you
holding
the
liability
bag.
But
a
teammate
better
conjures
an
image
of
AI’s
role

a
fast-working,
valuable
junior
that
needs
professional
supervision.

Anyone
asking
attorneys
to
make
a
significant
investment
in
this
technology

either
financially
or
with
adoption

needs
to
understand
they’re
coaxing
nervous
squirrels
by
holding
out
a
nut.
Minimize
anything
that’s
going
to
scare
them.

So,
what
does
this
teammate
bring
to
the
table?



Litigation
Workflows


Workflows
designed
to
support
disputes,
motions
practice,
discovery,
and
case
strategy.
Examples
include
draft
a
motion
to
dismiss,
draft
full
discovery
and
deposition
documents,
identify
top
cases
by
fact
pattern
or
legal
concept,
extract
facts,
and
compare
similar
arguments
or
laws
across
jurisdictions.



Transactional
Workflows


Workflows
focused
on
contracts,
deal
execution,
and
risk
assessment.
Examples
include
draft
a
transactional
document
or
clause,
generate
first-pass
agreements
from
term
sheets
or
templates,
redline
agreements
against
internal
standards
or
playbooks,
analyze
key
provisions
and
identify
high-risk
clauses,
review
contracts
for
diligence
risks,
and
extract
key
obligations
and
liabilities.



Broader
Legal
AI
Workflows


Designed
for
daily
legal
tasks
in
a
private,
secure
workspace,
powered
by
the
latest
AI
models
from
Anthropic
and
OpenAI
and,
in
the
U.S.,
integrated
with
LexisNexis
primary
law
and

Shepard’s®

Citations.
Examples
include
draft
a
client
alert,
extract
a
timeline
of
key
events,
summarize
an
interview,
and
transcribe
audio
to
text.

This
is
where
providers
with
a
deep
understanding
of
the
legal
sector
become
so
important.
Some
studies
suggest
that
consumer-facing
AI
products
like
ChatGPT
outperform
tools
built
specifically
for
the
legal
industry.
While
Grok
seems
to
excel
at

stripping
things
down
and
leaving
just
briefs
,
it’s
a
lot
less
reckless
to
put
faith
in
the
people
who
understand
the
space
and
have
mountains
of
specific
data
to
power
their
offerings.
Even
if
a
consumer
tool
can
produce
viable
work
product
with
the
benefit
of
publicly
available
knowledge

right
now
,
with
the
leap
toward
more
and
more
automation,
it’s
going
to
become
more
and
more
essential
that
the
architects
behind
those
products
draw
upon
trusted
experience
and
not
vibe
lawyering

built
by
an
idiot
.

As
technology
starts
making
decisions
without
direct
lawyer
intervention,
it

speeds
up
the
process
in
a
manner
that
invites
its
own
accidents
.
Preventing
errors
when
firms
go
“GPTsus
take
the
wheel,”
as
I’ve
put
it
in
the
past,
will
depend
on
good
design,
not
a
bot
trying
to
figure
out
how
to
perform
tasks
by
scraping
r/sovereigncitizen.
How
these
workflows
come
together
and
avoid
slippage
when
promising
“end-to-end”
work
will
be
the
secret
sauce.

And
to
the
extent
a
firm
wants
to
introduce
their
own
idiosyncrasies,
LexisNexis
will
have
a
custom
builder
for
customers
to
build
their
own
systems
leveraging
their
own
experience.

This
commercial
preview
seeks
feedback
from
key
LexisNexis
customers,
but
the
company
expects
to
roll
out
Protégé
workflows
more
broadly
2026.
The
pre-built
and
configurable
workflows,
as
well
as
their
Workflow
Builder,
will
launch
across
the
U.S.,
Canada,
U.K.,
Europe,
and
Asia
Pacific
markets.




HeadshotJoe
Patrice
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky

if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search
.

Georgetown Law Students Petition To Keep Their School From Becoming An ICE Recruitment Center – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Michael
M.
Santiago/Getty
Images)

It
is
plain
knowledge
that
Georgetown
Law
is
great
if
you’d
like
to
transition
your
legal
career
toward

working
for
the
government
.
That
said,
working
for
ICE
probably
isn’t
as
good
a
line
on
your
resume
as
you’d
like
it
to
be.
Killing
people
is
one
thing


ICE-related
deaths
have
been
on
the
rise

and
folks
haven’t
paid
it
much
mind

but
their
lawlessness
ramping
up
to
the
point
that
they’re
just
casually
violating
the
civil
rights
of
officers
and
arresting
them
isn’t
going
to
look
good
once
the
nation
overcomes
this
fever
dream:

This
is
the
exact
sort
of
behavior
you’d
expect
after
JD
Vance
and

The
Pop-Tart
Man

go
about
telling
the
poorly
trained
slave
catchers
demanding
freedom
papers
that
they
have

absolute

or

federal

immunity
to
fuck
with
whomever
they
please.

Despite
JD
Vance’s
black
eyeliner
crocodile
tears
about
how
he’s
the
real
victim
because
enabling
Trump’s
secret
police

made
it
hard
for
him
to
enjoy
Disneyland
with
his
kids
,
the
social
consequences
of
being
associated
with
ICE
continue.
Namely,
Georgetown
Law
students
are
petitioning
for
ICE
and
the
DHS
to
be
removed
from
the
school’s
career
fair.

The
Hoya

has
coverage:

More
than
1,100
students,
graduates
and
student
organizations
have

signed

the
petition
calling
on
Georgetown
Law
and
the
George
Washington
University
Law
School,
which
is
jointly
hosting
the
event,
to
remove
ICE
and
DHS
from
the
Public
Sector
Recruiting
Program
(PSRP),
a
virtual
career
fair
for
students
interested
in
working
in
the
public
sector.
The
petition
also
asks
the
universities
not
to
invite
ICE
and
DHS
to
any
future
career
fairs
or
school
events. 

“[W]e
do
not
want
ICE
on
our
campus,
whether
virtually
or
in-person
because
it
harms
our
students,”
[Annie]
Gillani
told
The
Hoya.
“It
sends
a
message
that
it’s
okay
for
Georgetown
students
to
be
working
at
agencies
that
are
ripping
families
apart,
killing
people
and
destroying
our
immigrant
communities.”

While
this
career
fair
is
a
virtual
one,
the
further
demand
for
ICE
and
DHS
to
keep
away
from
future,
potentially
in-person
recruitment
events
is
a
smart
one.
There
wasn’t
as
much
fear
when
“Kavanaugh
stops”
blessed
ICE
to
racially
profile
anyone
who
didn’t
look
like
they
came
from
a
long
line
of
WASPs,
but
now
that
white
soccer
moms
and
police
officers
are
proving
to
be
just
as
vulnerable,
the
fiction
that
ICE
only
goes
after
deserving
criminals
or
“are
just
doing
their
job
to
keep
us
safe”
is
progressively
getting
harder
to
maintain
for
a
lot
of
people.
Some
people
are
late
to
the
party,
but
they’re
welcome
nonetheless.

Georgetown
law
students
stepping
out
as
some
of
the
first
in
the
T14
isn’t
surprising.
They
put
their
actions
where
there
morals
were

when
they
called
Skadden
a
bunch
of
cowards
and
decided
to
opt
out
of
a
recruitment
event

last
year.
The
career
fair
is
scheduled
for
the
23rd.
Hopefully
the
only
ICE
in
attendance
will
be
chilling
drinks
rather
than
civil
liberties.


Students
Petition
GU
Law
Center
to
Remove
ICE
From
Career
Fair

[The
Hoya]


Earlier
:

Georgetown
Law
Student
Group
Calls
Skadden
Cowards,
Opts
Out
Of
Recruitment
Event



Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s
.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
is
learning
to
swim, is
interested
in
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected]
and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Goldman’s Top Lawyer In The Spotlight Thanks To Epstein Ties – Above the Law

Kathryn
Ruemmler
(Photo
by
William
B.
Plowman/NBC/NBC
Newswire/NBCUniversal
via
Getty
Images)



Ed.
note
:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature, Quote
of
the
Day
.


[I
had
a
professional
association
with
Jeffrey
Epstein
when]
it
was
my
job
to
engage
with
people
and
companies
that
had
serious
legal
and
public
relations
problems.
Many
were
under
criminal
investigation,
and
many
had
been
convicted
of
crimes. I
did
not
advocate
on
his
behalf
to
any
third
party—not
to
a
court,
not
to
the
press,
not
to
the
government.
[He
referred
clients
to
me
and]
also
informally
reached
out
to
me
for
advice
from
time
to
time
just
as
he
did
with
numerous
other
prominent
lawyers
throughout
the
country.


As
I
have
said,
I
regret
ever
knowing
him,
and
I
have
enormous
sympathy
for
the
victims
of
Epstein’s
crimes. 



— Kathryn
Ruemmler
,
chief
legal
officer
of
Goldman
Sachs,
in
comments
given
to
the

Wall
Street
Journal
,
concerning
her
association
with
sex
offender
Jeffrey
Epstein.
John
Rogers,
the
powerful
executive
at
Goldman,
was
reportedly
crafting
a
“contingency
plan”
for
Ruemmler’s
exit
given
her
Epstein
connections,
but
in
a
statement,
he
told
the
Journal,
“That
is
completely
untrue.”





Staci
Zaretsky
 is
the
managing
editor
of
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to email her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on BlueskyX/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

GenAI Courses In Law School: A Good Idea – Above the Law

Legal
training
has
long
followed
a
guild
system:
law
schools
teach
doctrine,
then
new
lawyers
learn
to
practice
by
working
alongside
experienced
attorneys.
This
apprenticeship
model
may
have
worked
well
decades
ago,
but
it’s
increasingly
problematic
today.
And
it
particularly
doesn’t
work
well
when
it
comes
to
GenAI
since
all
too
often
younger
lawyers
know
more
about
the
tools
than
more
experienced
lawyers.
But
they
lack
the
experience
and
critical
thinking
skills
to
use
them
effectively
in
the
practice,
as
I
have

discussed
.
That
leaves
a
significant
knowledge
and
training
gap.


The
Cleveland
State-AltaClaro
Announcement

Which
is
why
a
recent
joint
announcement
by

Cleveland
State
University
Law
School

and

AltaClaro


an
online,
hands-on
legal
training
provider

is
significant.

Together,
they
are
now
offering
a
course
to
law
students
at
CSU
entitled

Fundamentals
of
Prompt
Engineering
for
Lawyers
.
According
to
the

press
release

announcing
the
course,
it
will
be
offered
as
an
extracurricular
program
to
CSU
law
students
and
will
run
three
times
during
the
academic
year.
Reflecting
the
desire
and
interest
in
such
a
course,
within
the
first
week
of
the
announcement,
over
130
students
signed
up,
according
to
the
release.

As
stated
in
the
press
release,
“The
curriculum
focuses
on
practical
techniques
for
working
with
generative
AI
tools,
understanding
AI’s
limitations
in
legal
practice,
and
embedding
verification
and
professional
judgment
into
AI-assisted
legal
workflows.”
Students
who
complete
the
course
will
receive
a
certificate
that
they
can
use
on
their
resumes
and
on
social
media.

Recognizing
the
need
for
such
a
class,
Brian
Ray,
Co-Interim
Dean
at
CSU
College
of
Law,
is
quoted
in
the
release:
“Providing
this
course
to
our
students
represents
the
cornerstone
of
a
broader
strategy
to
integrate
responsible
and
effective
generative
AI
training
into
our
legal
education
curriculum.
Our
goal
is
for
employers
to
know
that
CSU|LAW
graduates
are
entering
the
profession
prepared
to
use
these
powerful
tools
thoughtfully,
ethically,
and
competently.”


AltaClaro’s
Approach

AltaClaro
and
its
training
programs
are
unique
in
many
ways.
They
combine
the
need
to
learn
from
life-like
simulations
with
feedback
from
experienced
attorneys
skilled
at
training.
AltaClaro’s
courses
adopt
a
three-step
approach:
providing
the
foundational
knowledge,
hands-on
practice
sessions
and
then,
perhaps
most
importantly,
an
interactive
review
with
the
experts
and
each
other.
The
instructors
are
carefully
vetted
before
they
are
selected.
They
must
be
currently
practicing
and
have
practiced
for
10
years
with
an
Am
Law
100
firm.
They
are
put
through
a
mock
training
session
and
must
get
high
ratings
from
the
participants
to
qualify.

But
that’s
not
the
only
thing
unique
about
what
AltaClaro
is
doing.
In
addition
to
its
regular
training
programs
for
young
lawyers,
it
has
gone
all
in
with
training
on
how
to
use
and
not
to
use
GenAI
tools.

As
I

have
discussed

before,
it
is
just
this
sort
of
training
that
is
so
needed
as
the
profession
confronts
the
brave
new
GenAI
world
where
younger
lawyers
know
the
tools
but
not
necessarily
how
to
use
them
effectively.
And
older
lawyers
know
how
to
practice
but
often
little
about
these
potentially
transformative
tools.

It’s
a
problematic
gap
generally
but
particularly
one
when
your
training
program
is
based
on
an
outmoded
catch-as-catch-can
guild
system.
The
danger
is
you
end
up
with
young
lawyers
using
the
tool
without
employing
critical
thinking
and
get
results
that
look
and
sound
good,
but
which
really
aren’t.


Closing
the
Gap

Recognizing
this
very
gap,
AltaClaro
offers
three
different
courses,
prompt
engineering
for
lawyers,
prompt
engineering
for
legal
professionals,
and
a
GenAI
supervisory
course
for
partners,
according
to
its
website.
I

wrote
about

AltaClaro
back
in
2023
when
it
first
announced
its
prompt
engineering
training
program
for
law
firms.
At
the
time
and
perhaps
even
today,
the
program
is
unique
in
that
it
combines
not
only
instruction
but
hands-on
training
and
feedback,
which
is
sorely
needed
to
master
GenAI.

I

wrote
about

AltaClaro
again
in
2024
when
it
announced
its
GenAI
program
for
supervising
partners.
Once
again,
the
program
was
unique
in
that
it
targeted
more
experienced
lawyers
to
help
them
oversee
those
in
their
teams
who
are
no
doubt
using
GenAI
tools.
The
program
was
developed
in
conjunction
with
the
law
firm
K&L
Gates.
At
the
time,
I
noted
how
rare
it
was
for
law
firms
to
recognize
the
need
to
train
their
partners
how
to
supervise
and
lead
teams
not
just
in
the
use
of
GenAI
but
generally.

With
the
Cleveland
State
announcement,
AltaClaro
is
at
it
again,
this
time
at
the
other
end
of
the
spectrum:
helping
law
students
master
GenAI
skills
before
they
get
out
in
the
real
world.
It’s
important
because
it
will
give
students
an
advantage
in
a
job
market
where
firms
are
actively
looking
for
young
lawyers
who
know
something
about
how
to
actually
use
the
tools.
If
nothing
else,
it
saves
them
training
time.

And
in
many
firms,
supervising
lawyers
may
not
have
a
clue
themselves
and
certainly
have
no
formal
training
programs.
That
leaves
it
to
younger
lawyers
to
figure
it
out
as
they
go.
That’s
not
healthy,
and
as
we
have
seen
from
all
the
citations
to
nonexistent
cases
or
those
which
contain
inaccuracies,
downright
dangerous.
So,
it
makes
absolute
sense
to
offer
such
a
program.


Some
Questions

As
expected,
the
initiative
raises
important
questions
about
implementation,
scope,
and
potential
unintended
consequences.

First
and
foremost,
there’s
a
commitment
question
since
the
course
is
an
extracurricular
one.
Given
the
potential
fundamental
impact
of
GenAI,
shouldn’t
it
be
a
mandatory,
for-credit
course
instead
of
just
optional?
The
optional
status
suggests
that
GenAI
competency
is
a
nice-to-have
rather
than
essential.
That’s
a
problem
when
ethical
rules
require
GenAI
competency.

And
will
the
course
be
long
enough
to
impart
the
kind
of
skill
and
knowledge
needed?
Moreover,
effective
use
of
GenAI
skills
requires
critical
thinking
skills,
as
I
have

discussed
.
Will
the
course
help
students
develop
these
skills?
Will
it
teach
students
to
think
like
lawyers
and
not
just
like
an
LLM?

And
there
is
the
reliance
factor.
Firms
may
see
the
certificate
and
think
the
holder
knows
all
there
is
to
know
about
GenAI
and
conclude
no
further
training
is
necessary.
It’s
already
bad
enough
when
older
lawyers
presume
that
just
because
a
lawyer
is
younger,
they
somehow
have
all
the
tech
skills
needed.
Now
firms
can
point
to
someone
with
an
honest
to
goodness
certificate
confirming
that
misplaced
assumption.


A
Start

But
given
all
that,
the
course
is
a
start.
It’s
a
recognition
on
the
part
of
the
law
school
of
the
need
for
training
in
a
tremendously
important
area
that,
for
better
or
worse,
is
remaking
the
profession.
CSU
is
joining
a
group
of
law
schools
like
Vanderbilt,
Suffolk,
and
others
who
recognize
their
responsibility
to
students
and,
for
that
matter,
to
the
profession
to
deal
with
the
realities
of
GenAI
in
a
systematic
way.

As
for
AltaClaro,
I
have
never
taken
one
of
their
courses
and
can’t
vouch
for
how
good
they
are.
But
the
concept
is
sound:
training
by
doing
and
using
experts
not
only
to
talk
but
to
show
and
guide
in
actual
simulations.
As
cofounder

Abdi
Shayesteh
,
once
told
me,
“You
can’t
learn
to
swim
by
watching
videos.”

AltaClaro’s
approach
to
legal
training
is
refreshing
and
its
recognition
of
the
need
for
GenAI
training
is
not
only
noteworthy,
but
also
of
critical
importance.
GenAI
is
not
going
away
and,
as
we
see
over
and
over
as
courts
sanction
lawyers
for
inappropriate
use,
understanding
it
and
how
to
use
it
are
fundamental
to
today’s
practice.

The
time
has
come
for
systematic
GenAI
training
in
law
schools.
The
question
isn’t
whether
law
schools
should
offer
these
courses,
it’s
whether
they
can
afford
to
not
only
offer
them
but
to
make
them
mandatory.






Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger,
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads
,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law

Brutal, Humiliating Benchslap Puts An End To Lindsey Halligan Experiment – Above the Law

Lindsey
Halligan
(Photo
by
Al
Drago/Getty
Images)

Lindsey
Halligan
has
finally
done
the
one
thing
the
Department
of
Justice
steadfastly
refused
to
do
for
months:
acknowledge
reality.
Following
an
extended
farce
of
legally
illiterate
cosplay
as
the
“United
States
Attorney
for
the
Eastern
District
of
Virginia,”
Halligan
had
to
hang
up
her
wings
and
tutu
as
Judge
David
Novak
declared
that
playtime
was
over.
In

an
18-page
benchslapping
,
Judge
Novak
formally
barred
Halligan
from
continuing
to
call
herself
a
U.S.
Attorney
in
filings
until
she
either
gets
confirmed
by
the
Senate
or
appointed
by
the
district
judges
under
28
U.S.C.
§
546(d).
Since
neither
option
had
much
chance,
Pam
Bondi
announced
that

Halligan
would
be
leaving
her
not-really-her-job
.

She
joins
Alina
Habba

another
lawyer
with
more
cable
news
presence
than
criminal
prosecutorial
know-how

in
having
to

sheepishly
depart
a
U.S.
Attorney
role
she
held
illegally
.

The
opinion
marks
a
ignominious
end
for
the
insurance
lawyer
without
any
criminal
law
background,
whose
only
qualification
for
the
job
was
a
willingness
to
pursue
federal
criminal
cases
based
on
Donald
Trump’s
fever
dreams.
When
attorneys
with
experience
and
principles
refused
to
launch
phony
prosecutions
to
harass
Trump’s
enemies,
the
president
published

what
was
almost
certainly
meant
as
a
DM
to
Attorney
General
Pam
Bondi

complaining
that
no
one
had
pursued
his
perceived
rivals
and
flagging
Halligan
as
the
sort
of
lawyer
who
could
get
in
there
and
bring
cases
against
former
FBI
Director
James
Comey
and
current
NY
Attorney
General
Letitia
James.

And
Halligan
proved
the
president
right
to
the
extent
the

sort
of
lawyer

willing
to
sign
onto
those
cases
required
one
with
no
clue
what
she
was
doing
and
a
degree
from
the
Dunning-Kruger
School
of
Law.
She
promptly
wasted
taxpayer
dollars
on

two
cases
swiftly
laughed
out
of
court
.
While
neither
case
had
much
going
for
it

the

James
case
kept
getting
rejected
by
grand
jurors

and
the
Comey
indictment

wasn’t
even
signed
by
a
grand
jury


the
biggest
problem
was
Halligan’s
own
illegal
appointment.

Those
decisions
were
made
by
Judge
Cameron
McGowan
Currie
of
the
District
of
South
Carolina,
sitting
by
designation
by
order
of
Fourth
Circuit
Chief
Judge
Albert
Diaz
to
conclusively
resolve
the
matter
of
Halligan’s
appointment
without
requiring
the
judges
of
the
Eastern
District

who
might
be
charged
with
finding
her
replacement

to
decide
the
issue.
Spoiler:
This
will
be
relevant.

But
despite
Judge
Currie’s
order,
Halligan
stuck
around
anyway,
continuing
to
identify
herself
as
the
head
of
the
office,
until
Judge
Novak
penned
what
can
best
be
described
as
an
Order
To
Explain
What
The
Hell,
Lady?

asking
her
to
explain
why
the
court
kept
seeing
her
name
on
documents
as
though
nothing
had
happened.
The
DOJ’s

response

wasn’t
so
much
legal
advocacy
as
a
Newsmax
chyron
with
footnotes.
It
marked
the
natural
and
logical
endpoint
of
a
strategy
forged
by
a
DOJ
brain
trust
that
believes
“being
loud
on
TV”
counts
as
a
litigation
strategy.

Ms.
Halligan’s
response,
in
which
she
was
joined
by
both
the
Attorney
General
and
the
Deputy
Attorney
General,
contains
a
level
of
vitriol
more
appropriate
for
a
cable
news
talk
show
and
falls
far
beneath
the
level
of
advocacy
expected
from
litigants
in
this
Court,
particularly
the
Department
of
Justice.

Judge
Novak
is
a

Trump-appointee
.
It’s
a
reminder
that
while
there
are
some

in-over-their-head
Trump-nominated
district
judges

and
a
bevy
of
Republican
Circuit
Court
judges

willing
to
light
fire
to
their
dignity
to
stay
in
Trump’s
good
graces
,
the
federal
trial
courts
have,
more
often
than
not,

put
aside
partisanship
to
honor
the
rule
of
law
.

Bondi,
Blanche,
and
Halligan


that
three-headed
dragon
meme
if
all
three
heads
sported
googly
eyes


decided
to
tell
Judge
Novak
that
the
court
ruling
Halligan’s
appointment
illegal
in
the
Comey
and
James
cases
didn’t
apply
to
any
other
cases
and
every
criminal
defendant
would
need
to
relitigate
the
issue
from
scratch.
Judge
Novak
declined
the
invitation
to
turn
validity
of
every
prosecution
in
the
district
into
legal
whack-a-mole.

Rather
stunningly,
Ms.
Halligan
fails
to
even
mention
Chief
Judge
Diaz’s
Order,
let
alone
discuss
its
impact
here.
In
short,
Ms.
Halligan
has
not
only
ignored
Judge
Currie’s
rulings,
she
has
also
turned
a
blind
eye
to
an
Order
from
the
Chief
Judge
of
the
Fourth
Circuit.
The
Court
finds
it
inconceivable
that
the
Department
of
Justice,
which
holds
a
duty
to
faithfully
execute
the
laws
of
the
United
States

even
those
with
which
it
may
have
disagreement

would
repeatedly
ignore
court
orders,
while
simultaneously
prosecuting
citizens
for
breaking
the
law.

Is
it
stunning,
though?

For
an
added
injection
of
comedy:
even
if
Halligan’s
appointment

had

been
valid,
it
would
have
expired
on
January
20,
2026,
the
day
Judge
Novak
issued
this
order.
So
the
120-day
clock
ran
out…
again!
This
whole
exercise
in
defiance
was
for

nothing
.

The
DOJ’s
attempt
to
bootstrap
this
to
the
Supreme
Court’s
attack
on
nationwide
injunctions,
a
dunderheaded
argument
from
the
start,
also
earned
an
exasperated
eye
roll
from
Judge
Novak:

The
Court’s
concerns
about
Ms.
Halligan’s
representation
do
not
implicate
the
specific
concerns
that
the
CASA
Court
set
out
to
address
and,
more
importantly,
do
not
reach
beyond
this
Court,
let
alone
across
the
Nation.
Rather,
the
Court
simply
applies
the
legal
precedent
promulgated
by
Judge
Currie’s
Order,
which
disposed
of
the
validity
of
Ms.
Halligan’s
appointment
for
all
matters
in
which
her
unlawful
appointment
becomes
an
issue
in
this
District,
to
include
the
specific
indictment
in
the
case
at
hand.

“Simply
flouting
a
judicial
order
because
of
a
disagreement
of
‘interpretation’
and
acting
like
that
order
does
not
exist
is
simply
not
an
option,”
Judge
Novak
writes.

But
the
most
surgically
cruel
jab
comes
at
the
end,
as
Judge
Novak
declines
to
refer
Halligan
to
disciplinary
authorities:

The
Court
recognizes
that
Ms.
Halligan
lacks
the
prosecutorial
experience
that
has
long
been
the
norm
for
those
nominated
to
the
position
of
United
States
Attorney
in
this
District.
Consequently,
and
in
light
of
her
inexperience,
the
Court
grants
Ms.
Halligan
the
benefit
of
the
doubt
and
refrains
from
referring
her
for
further
investigation
and
disciplinary
action
regarding
her
misrepresentations
to
this
Court
at
this
time.


You’re
not
malicious,
just
stupid

is
a
rough
passage
to
have
published
in
the
annals
of
American
law.

But
it’s
a
frustrating
conclusion
to
reach.

Virginia
authorities
have
already
indicated

that
they
won’t
bother
enforcing
professional
ethics
without
an
engraved
invitation
from
a
judge…
and
maybe
not
even
then.
Does
anyone
have
jurisdiction
over
accountability
anymore?
Or
is
this
just
an
elaborate
game
of
hot
potato
until
everyone
gives
up?
Leniency
is
a
virtue,
but
at
a
certain
point
someone
has
to
put
their
foot
down,
because

to
borrow
from
Judge
Novak
himself

simply
flouting
a
judicial
order
because
of
a
disagreement
will
continue
to
be
the
DOJ’s
plan
of
action
as
long
as
everyone
keeps
treating
these
lawyers
like
misguided
students
instead
of
willful
bad
actors.
Halligan
may
be
out,
but
whoever
comes
next
will
push
even
further,
knowing
the
worst
that
happens
is
a
strongly
worded
opinion
that
declines
to
follow
through.

But
firewalls
only
work
if
breaching
them
carries
an
actual
cost.


Earlier
:

Lindsey
Halligan
Says
Her
‘I’m
An
Illegal
Appointment’
T-Shirt
Has
People
Asking
A
Lot
Of
Questions
Already
Answered
By
Her
Shirt


Judge
Demands
Fake
U.S.
Attorney
Explain
Why
She’s
Still
Pretending
To
Be
U.S.
Attorney


Virginia
State
Bar
Whistles
Past
Lindsey
Halligan
Ethics
Complaint
Claiming
It’s
Not
Their
Job


Alina
Habba
Quits
Job
She
Never
Legally
Held




HeadshotJoe
Patrice
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or

Bluesky

if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a

Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search
.

Trump’s Recent Tariff Edicts Seem To Ignore The Supreme Court’s Skepticism – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Win
McNamee/Getty
Images)

Last
month,
I
wrote
about
the

Trump
tariffs

now
under
review
by
the
Supreme
Court.
The
case
was
on
an
expedited
schedule,
with
an
opinion
expected
by
the
end
of
2025.
Yet
it
is
now
January
2026,
and
no
ruling
has
been
issued;
one
is
not
anticipated
until
February
at
the
earliest.

During
oral
arguments,
the
justices
expressed
clear
skepticism
about
Trump’s
rationale
for
invoking
the
International
Emergency
Economic
Powers
Act
(IEEPA)
to
impose
tariffs.
The
IEEPA
does
not
explicitly
authorize
tariffs.
It
permits
the
president
to
regulate
imports
only
to
address
an
unusual
or
extraordinary
threat

to
national
security,
foreign
policy,
or
the
economy.

Given
the
court’s
apparent
doubts
and
the
real
possibility
that
it
could
strike
down
these
tariffs
as
an
improper
use
of
IEEPA,
has
the
Trump
administration
adjusted
its
approach
to
address
those
concerns?

Let’s
examine
Trump’s
recent
tariff
actions
to
assess
whether
they
truly
involve
emergencies
or
represent
a
legitimate
exercise
of
IEEPA
authority.


Tariffs
Against
Iran

In
December
2025,
Iranians
protested
nationwide
against
their
government
amid
a
severe
economic
crisis:
the
rial
collapsed
to
record
lows
(over
1.4
million
to
the
U.S.
dollar),
inflation
ran
rampant
(40%
to
50%
annually,
with
food
prices
up
about
72%
year-on-year),
and
costs
for
essentials
like
cooking
oil,
meat,
and
fuel
soared.
Widespread
poverty,
unemployment,
and
mismanagement

worsened
by
international
sanctions
and
the
12-day
war
with
Israel
in
June
2025

fueled
the
unrest.

The
regime
responded
by
shutting
down
the
internet,
severely
limiting
outside
communication
and
obscuring
reports
of
casualties.

On
January
12,
2026,
Trump
announced
a
25%
tariff
on
countries
doing
business
with
Iran,
citing
the
crackdown
on
protesters.
No
further
details
have
emerged
on
implementation
or
what
qualifies
as
“doing
business”
with
Iran.

Iran’s
top
trading
partners
include
China
(its
largest,
importing
$14
billion
in
goods),
Iraq,
the
United
Arab
Emirates,
Afghanistan,
Pakistan,
India,
and
Russia.

U.S.-Iran
relations
have
been
hostile
for
decades,
marked
by
the
1979
hostage
crisis,
support
for
opposing
proxies
in
regional
conflicts,
nuclear
tensions,
and
mutual
accusations
of
terrorism
sponsorship.

Despite
this
rocky
history,
Iran’s
current
government
faces
internal
chaos
and
poses
no
immediate
external
threat
to
the
United
States.
These
tariffs
appear
designed
to
further
destabilize
Iran’s
economy
in
pursuit
of
regime
change.
Paradoxically,
if
tariffs
drives
up
prices
inside
Iran,
they
could
give
the
regime
a
convenient
scapegoat

blaming
the
U.S.
for
the
hardship

potentially
rallying
domestic
support.


Trump’s
Threat
To
Tariff
French
Wine
And
Champagne

On
Tuesday,
French
President
Emmanuel
Macron
declined
Trump’s
invitation
to
join
his
newly
formed
“Board
of
Peace”
(a
body
Trump
has
suggested

might
replace
the
United
Nations
).
In
response,
Trump
threatened
a
200%
tariff
on
French
wine
and
champagne.

To
Trump’s
credit,
this
tariff
would
target
only
Americans
who
know
what
“Château”
means.
Aficianados
might
reluctantly
pay
more
for
their
Dom
Pérignon,
swirling
their
glasses
an
extra
45
seconds
while
insisting
the
tariff
hasn’t
dulled
their
superior
palates.

Imposing
tariffs
over
a
personal
snub
hardly
qualifies
as
an
international
emergency
or
a
threat
to
U.S.
interests.

Norway
has
also

declined

to
join
the
Board
of
Peace,
yet
no
tariffs
have
been
threatened

perhaps
because
Trump
holds
Norwegians
in
higher
regard
than,
say,

Haitians
.


Tariffs
Against
NATO
Countries
In
Response
To
Greenland

Finally,
Trump
has
targeted
Greenland,
citing
national
security
risks
from
Russia
and
China

though
the
push
also
stems
from
not
winning
the
Nobel
Peace
Prize.

He
announced
that
all
NATO
countries
in
Europe
would
face
a
10%
tariff
on
exports
to
the
U.S.
starting
February
1,
rising
to
25%
on
June
1,
unless
a
deal
is
reached
to
sell
Greenland
to
the
United
States.

European
leaders
from
the
affected
nations
have
declared
full
solidarity
with
Denmark
and
Greenland’s
people.
The
prospect
of
a
U.S.-EU
trade
war
has
rattled
markets,
prompting
shifts
like
Canada’s
new
trade
deal
with
China
allowing
Chinese
cars
into
its
market.

Russia
and
China
have
shown
no
interest
in
buying
or
invading
Greenland.
As
part
of
Denmark

a
NATO
ally

any
aggression
would
trigger
Article
5,
obligating
collective
defense,
with
the
U.S.
(the
alliance’s
dominant
power,
right
next
door
via
Canada)
leading
the
response.
This
arrangement
already
neutralizes
any
genuine
security
threat.
To
the
extent
a
risk
exists,
it
stems
from
Trump’s
own
aggressive
rhetoric.

The
Supreme
Court’s
skepticism
toward
Trump’s
IEEPA
tariff
claims
should
caution
reflection
and
restraint.
Yet
his
actions
suggest
tariffs
are
being
wielded
not
for
national
security
emergencies,
but
to
pursue
regime
change
(which
could
backfire),
coerce
foreign
leaders
into
joining
his
Board
of
Peace,
and
exact
revenge
for
perceived
slights
like
missing
out
on
a
Nobel
Peace
Prize.
Until
the
court
rules,
Trump
appears
poised
to
continue
using
tariffs
unilaterally
to
bend
people
and
countries
to
his
will.




Steven
Chung
is
a
tax
attorney
in
Los
Angeles,
California.
He
helps
people
with
basic
tax
planning
and
resolve
tax
disputes.
He
is
also
sympathetic
to
people
with
large
student
loans.
He
can
be
reached
via
email
at [email protected].
Or
you
can
connect
with
him
on
Twitter
(
@stevenchung)
and
connect
with
him
on 
LinkedIn.

Tomorrow: Tales From The Witness Stand – What ‘Winning’ Expert Testimony Looks Like – Above the Law

Whether
you’re
cross-examining
or
putting
forth
an
expert
witness,
effectively
managing
their
testimony
is
a
difficult
task.

Experts
must
garner
the
respect
of
the
judge
and
jury
while
also
defending
their
own
credibility

a
precarious
balancing
act,
particularly
when
faced
with
effective
cross-examination.

Join
us
on
January
22nd
at
1
p.m.
ET for
this
webinar
presented
by
our
friends
at
GLG,
where
our
panel
will
look
at
all
things
expert
testimony
in
2025.


We’ll
explore:


What
“winning”
expert
testimony
looks
like

Examples
of
expert
testimony
from
notable
cases

How
effective
lawyers
cross-examine
experts

How
top
expert
witnesses
translate
specialized
jargon
for
factfinders

Trends
in
expert
witness
preparation,
including
the
role
of
technology 

Be
part
of
the
first
conversation
unpacking
these
findings

and
see
where
your
department
stands
in
this
new
era
of
IP
management.


Don’t
miss
out,
sign
up
today.

1
hour
CLE
credit

is
available
for
live
attendees.
  

Judge And Wife Shot At Home – Above the Law

Tippecanoe
County judge
Steven
P.
Meyer
and
his
wife
Kimberly

were
shot

in
their
Indiana
home
on
Sunday.
Both
are
currently
listed
in
stable
condition,
but
the
shooter
remains
at
large
and
law
enforcement
has
not
released
any
information
about
a
possible
suspect.
The
Lafayette
Police
Department
is
leading
the
investigation
alongside
Indiana
State
Police,
the
Tippecanoe
County
Sheriff’s
Office,
the
West
Lafayette
Police
Department,
the
Tippecanoe
County
Prosecutor’s
Office,
and
the
FBI.

The
shooter
comes
against
a
backdrop
of

rising
threats

against
judges.
A
fact
that
clearly
weighed
on
Chief
Justice
of
Indiana
Loretta
H.
Rush.
She

didn’t
mince
words

about
what
this
moment
means
for
the
judiciary.
“I
worry
about
the
safety
of
all
our
judges,”
she
said.
“As
you
work
to
peacefully
resolve
more
than
1
million
cases
a
year,
you
must
not
only
feel
safe,
you
must
also
be
safe.
Any
violence
against
a
judge
or
a
judge’s
family
is
completely
unacceptable.
As
public
servants,
you
are
dedicated
to
the
rule
of
law.”

The
American
Bar
Association

echoed

that
concern.
ABA
President
Michelle
A.
Behnke
said,
“No
judge
should
feel
threatened
because
they
did
their
job
and
made
a
ruling.
Justice
and
democracy
cannot
operate
if
decisions
are
influenced
by
a
judge’s
concern
over
their
safety
or
the
safety
of
their
families.”

Indiana
Lt.
Gov.
Micah
Beckwith

wrote
,
“I
was
devastated
to
learn
that
a
sitting
judge
in
Tippecanoe
County,
the
Honorable
Steve
Meyer,
and
his
wife
were
shot
in
their
home
this
past
weekend.
Judges
serve
our
communities
by
delivering
justice,
and
they
must
be
able
to
do
so
without
fear
for
their
own
safety.”

Threats
against
judges
have
become

increasingly
common

over
the
past
year,
with
a
growing
culture
that
treats
courts
as
just
another
battlefield
in
a
partisan
war.
Judges
don’t
get
to
pick
their
cases.
They
don’t
get
to
rule
only
when
the
outcome
will
be
popular.
And
they
certainly
don’t
sign
up
for
their
families
to
become
collateral
damage.




Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast
,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her

with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1
 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].