Author: TSA Press

One
Hell
Of
A
Paper
Trail:
The
attorney’s
social
media
posts
are
chilling.
These
Are
The
Top
200
Lawyers!:
See
any
familiar
names
on
the
list?
Kirkland
Makes
Good
On
Some
Of
That
$125M
Trump
Fidelity
Pledge:
They
will
be
directing
their
services
to
a
conservative
think
tank.
TikTok
Ban
Extended
For
A
4th
Time:
Will
negotiations
close
out
before
a
5th
is
needed?
On
This
Week
Of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer:
It
was
the
Justice
Barrett
of
times,
it
was
the
Justice
Sotomayor
of
times…

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

Today,
New
York
County
Supreme
Court
Justice
Arthur
Engoron
ruled
in
favor
of
which
law
firm,
holding
that
former
NYC
mayor
Rudy
Giuliani
owed
the
firm
$1.36
million
—
plus
interest
—
for
legal
work
performed
on
his
behalf
between
November
2019
and
July
2023?

Hint:
The
firm
represented
Giuliani
in
the
congressional
investigation
into
the
January
6th
coup,
an
investigation
into
Giuliani’s
Ukrainian
business
dealing,
and
investigations
into
Donald
Trump’s
efforts
to
overturn
the
results
of
the
2020
election.

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

Donald
Trump
has
a
certain
instinct
for
organized
crime.
It’s
how

his
own
former
lawyer
described
Trump’s
business
management.
So
maybe
it’s
not
a
surprise
that
he
runs
right
to
RICO
whenever
he
wants
to
throw
a
tantrum
in
court.
He
invoked
the
statute
in
his

loony
lawsuit
against
every
Democrat
in
D.C.
and,
as
the
T-shirt
would
say,
“all
I
got
was
this
lousy
$1
million
sanction
for
filing
a
frivolous
suit.”

But
that
was
when
he
sat
on
the
civilian
side
of
the
ledger.
Now
that
he’s
converted
the
Department
of
Justice
into
his
personal
grievance
clearing
house,
he
has
the
benefit
of
sending
taxpayer-funded
lawyers
into
court…
to
file
frivolous
cases.

Last
week,
Trump
went
to
Joe’s
Seafood,
Prime
Steak
&
Stone
Crab
with
Vice
President
JD
Vance,

Acting
Archivist
Marco
Rubio,
and
Secretary
of
Not-the-Department-of-War
Pete
Hegseth.
While
at
dinner,
activist
group
Code
Pink
heckled
the
group.
In
response,
the
gathering
of
hardcore
alpha
males
went
crying
to
Pam
Bondi
to
protect
them
from
the
scary
women
hurting
their
feelings.

“I’ve
asked
[Bondi]
to
look
into
that
in
terms
of
RICO,
bringing
RICO
cases,”
Trump
said.
“They
should
be
put
in
jail,
what
they’re
doing
to
this
country
is
really
subversive.”
Which
is
a
Yelp
review,
not
RICO.

In
a
sane
administration,
this
is
where
the
adults
in
the
room
step
in
to
tell
the
increasingly
obvious
sundowning
president
that,
no,
in
fact
protesters
are
not
a
racketeering
operation.
But
here
in
Trump
II:
Electric
Boogaloo,
every
official
scrambles
to
the
nearest
cable
news
hit
to
rubberstamp
whatever
baseless
theory
comes
out
of
the
Oval
Office,
so
Deputy
Attorney
General
Todd
Blanche
ran
to
CNN
for
some
banana
republic
cosplay
about
the
boss’s

brilliant
suggestion
that
a
handful
of
women
disrupting
dinner
amounts
to
a
criminal
conspiracy.

Now
we
turn
it
over
to
Ken
White,
who
responds
to
stupid
efforts
to
use
the
RICO
statute
like
Bruce
Wayne
catching
a
glimpse
of
the
Bat-Signal:

As
Kaitlan
Collins
correctly
sets
up
the
topic,
Todd
Blanche
is
arguing
that
a
statute
designed
to
dismantle
the
Gambino
Crime
Family
and
take
on
Al
Qaeda
and
direct
it
at
the
notorious
criminal
enterprise
of
*checks
notes*
the
Ladies
Who
Lunch.

Blanche,
to
his
enduring
professional
detriment,

continued:

“So
is
it,
again,
sheer
happenstance
that
individuals
show
up
at
a
restaurant
where
the
president
is
trying
to
enjoy
dinner
in
Washington,
DC,
and
accost
him
with
vile
words
and
vile
anger?
And
meanwhile,
he’s
simply
trying
to
have
dinner.
Does
it
mean
it’s
just
completely
random
that
they
showed
up?
Maybe,”
Blanche
said
on
“The
Source.”
“But
to
the
extent
that
it’s
part
of
an
organized
effort
to
inflict
harm
and
terror
and
damage
to
the
United
States,
there’s
potential,
potential
investigations
there.”

No,
there
are
not.

They
showed
up
because
Trump
was
there,
and
they
yelled
at
him.
While
we’re
at
it
what
does
“accost
him
with
vile
words
and
vile
anger”
mean?
Where
does
it
fit
on
a
protest
scale
relative
to
“storming
the
Capitol
and
trying
to
beat
cops
to
death
with
fire
extinguishers?”
Because
apparently
that’s
the
basis
of
a
full
pardon,
so
we
really
need
to
nail
down
where
this
veers
into
organized
crime.

RICO
requires,
in
a
nutshell,
racketeering
activity
and
an
enterprise
carrying
it
out.
Blanche
suggests
that
there’s
some
mass
conspiracy
—
probably
directed
by
George
Soros,
since
everything
is
with
these
people
—
to
send
protesters
wherever
the
president
goes.
The
problem,
as
White’s
post
notes,
is
that

even
if
that
fever
dream
enterprise
existed,
there’s
no
racketeering!
Because
the
predicate
acts
for
RICO
are
a

relatively
small
list
of
specific
crimes
like
murder
and
arson.
Hurting
the
president’s

fee-fees,
it
will
shock
you
not
at
all,
does
not
make
the
list.

This
is
the
kind
of
legal
theory
that
would
embarrass
a
1L.
It’s
something
for
your
dumbest
relative
to
post
before
ending
up
on
Bad
Legal
Takes.

Pressed
by
Collins
on
whether
the
protesters
were
inflicting
harm
by
shouting
at
the
president,
Blanche
said,
“I
mean,
honestly,
so
you’re
asking
whether
there’s
damage
done
by
four
individuals
screaming
and
yelling
at
the
president
of
our
United
States
while
he’s
trying
to
have
dinner?
That
can’t
be
a
serious
question.”

It
shouldn’t
be
a
serious
question,
but
not
for
the
reasons
Blanche
is
going
for
here.

Blanche
knows
this
is
garbage
too.
That’s
why
he
couches
it
in
lawyerly
“potential”
and
“maybe,”
so
he
can
gaslight
disciplinary
counsel
later
while
Trump
claps
like
a
seal
watching
clips
on
Fox
&
Friends.
On
a
transcript,
divorced
of
tone,
Blanche’s
response
here
looks
like
he’s

not
saying
something
insane.
Good
luck
on
the
plausible
deniability.

No
judge
is
going
for
this.
Frankly,
no
D.C.
grand
jury
is
going
for
this.
These
are
the
same
people
returning
no
bills
on

far
more
colorable
cases
than
this
RICO
clown
show.
It’s
just
cable
Kabuki,
a
farce
played
out
to
make
Trump
feel
like
he
made
a
smart
suggestion
before
the
DOJ
quietly
drops
it.

But
that’s
still
a
problem.
The
media
needs
to
stop
indulging
this
nonsense.
They
don’t

have
to
invite
administration
officials
on
to
make
up
stuff.
After
Trump
spouted
off
about
RICO,
there’s
no
obligation
to
bring
Blanche
on
to
explain
it.
What’s
he
going
to
do?
He’s
not
going
to
tell
the
emperor
he’s
got
no
clothes.
And
so
we
spin
out
this
stupid
idea
for
another
news
cycle.

When

Justice
Sotomayor
wonders
whatever
happened
to
civic
education,
the
media’s
compulsion
to
platform
stupid
legal
arguments
is
part
of
it.

---

Joe
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.

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

You
can
comment
on
things
as
long
as
they’re
not
going
to
be
detrimental
to
others
or
derogatory.
It
doesn’t
prohibit
people
from
speaking
out;
it
cautions
them
to
pause
and
think
about
the
ramifications
of
what
they
are
posting.

—

Cari
Brunelle,
founding
partner
of
law
firm
advisory
Baretz+Brunelle,
in
comments
given
to
the

American
Lawyer,
in
the
wake
of
Perkins
Coie’s
decision
to
fire
an
associate
who



made
social
media
comments
about
the
death
of
conservative
activist


Charlie
Kirk.
Brunelle
went
on
to
say
that
social
media
policies
“should
be
aligned
with
your
firm’s
values
and
culture
so
much
that
those
who
see
your
response
think
it
makes
perfect
sense.
When
organizations
don’t
have
a
process
that’s
followed
in
every
circumstance,
their
decisions
can
be
driven
by
emotion
instead.
And
that’s
when
they
get
into
trouble.”

---

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 Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

The

Corporate
Legal
Operations
Consortium,
the
plucky
book
club
that
transformed
into
an
industry
guild
of
in-house
efficiency
experts,
announced
a
change
at
the
top
this
morning.
Jenn
McCarron,
who
has
served
as
President
of
the
Board
of
Directors
since
January
2024,
stepped
down
to
throw
herself
into
her
role
as
co-founder
and
CEO
of

Contracts.ai.

Áine
Lyons,
Senior
Vice
President
and
Deputy
General
Counsel
of

Workday,
will
assume
the
president’s
role
to
serve
out
the
rest
of
McCarron’s
term,
which
concludes
at
the
end
of
the
calendar
year.

“Serving
CLOC
has
been
the
greatest
honor
of
my
career,”
said
McCarron
in
a
press
release.
“This
community
has
elevated
the
practice
of
legal
operations,
redefined
how
legal
teams
partner
with
the
business,
and
on
a
personal
note,
shaped
me
as
an
innovator.
I
am
deeply
proud
of
what
we
have
built
together
and
look
forward
to
seeing
CLOC
continue
to
thrive
under
its
next
chapter.”

Before
assuming
the
top
post,
McCarron
served
as
a
Board
member
for
a
number
of
years,
championing
diversity
and
inclusion
initiatives
in
the
legal
operations
space
and
amplifying
“the
voice
of
legal
operations
at
the
intersection
of
business
and
law
at
every
opportunity.”
She
launched
the

CLOC
Talk
podcast
back
in
2020,
which
recently

celebrated
its
100th
episode.

CLOC
Executive
Director
Oyango
A.
Snell
praised
McCarron’s
impact:
“Jenn
is
a
visionary
leader
whose
energy,
passion,
and
commitment
have
left
an
indelible
mark
on
CLOC
and
the
broader
legal
ecosystem.
Her
leadership
has
elevated
the
profession
worldwide.
We
are
grateful
for
her
impact
and
excited
for
the
innovation
she
will
bring
to
the
industry.”

Lyons
pledged
to
continue
to
shape
and
modernize
governance
policies,
while
overseeing
the
next
big
task:
electing
and
onboarding
a
slate
of
new
members.

---

Joe
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.

Biglaw
firm
Husch
Blackwell
—
a
firm
with
$707,800,000
gross
revenue
last
year,
making
it
#78
on
the
Am
Law
100
ranking
—
is
defending
itself
against
a
purported
class
action
lawsuit
alleging
the
firm
misused
retirement
funds.
According
to
the
lawsuit,
filed
in
Missouri
federal
court,
the
firm
“routinely
withheld
funds
from
employee
paychecks
for
the
purpose
of
contributing
those
funds
to
employees’
accounts
in
the
plan,”
but
all
of
those
funds
did
not
go
directly
into
the
retirement
accounts.
The
complaint
alleges
some
of
the
money
was
placed
into
a
general
account
used
for
firm
operating
expenses
for
“months
at
a
time,”
in
violation
of
the
Employee
Retirement
Income
Security
Act.

According
to
the
lawsuit,
“The
Husch
Blackwell
defendants’
breaches
of
fiduciary
duty
arise
from
a
deliberate
scheme
to
use
their
employees’
retirement
plan
contributions
for
the
firm’s
own
benefit.”

The
named
plaintiff
in
the
matter
is
Tyler
Paetkau,
a
former
attorney
at
Husch
and
currently
the
founding
attorney
of
Paetkau
Law
Group.
The
complaint
purports
to
represent
a
class
of
all
participants
of
the
retirement
plan
whose
contributions
were
not
sent
to
the
retirement
plan
within
the
statutorily
mandated
timeframe,
dating
back
to
September
16,
2019.
The
class
is
estimated
to
have
~400
members.

Paetkau’s
attorney,
Charles
Field
of
Sanford
Heisler
Sharp
McKnight
and
Fell
Law,

told
Law.com
his
firm
has
brought
other
ERISA
matters
against
employers:

Field
said
he
has
a
process
for
analyzing
financial
data
and
assessing
the
performance
of
funds
to
determine
whether
a
proposed
class
action
is
warranted.
This
one
against
Husch
met
the
bar.

“This
one
was
pretty
easy
to
deconstruct,”
he
said.
“The
law
is
clear.
By
the
15th
day
of
the
following
month,
those
funds
need
to
be
in
the
401(k)
plan.
We
looked
to
see
if
there
was
something
we
were
missing.
We
couldn’t
find
anything,
exhausted
our
due
diligence,
and
filed
the
claim.”

Husch
Blackwell
has
not
commented
on
the
lawsuit.

Read
the
complaint
below.

---

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].

Amy
Coney
Barrett
and
Sonia
Sotomayor
are
both
hitting
the
talk
shows
and
it’s
highlighting
how
awkward
the
nation’s
relationship
with
the
Supreme
Court
really
is.
Barrett
went
on
Fox
and
accurately
stated
that
the
Constitution
prohibits
Trump
running
for
a
third
term.
Then
the
host
offered
a
“wink
wink”
prompt
and

she
started
backpedaling.
Meanwhile,
Sotomayor
went
on
Colbert
and
bent
over
backward
to
give
her
conservative
colleagues
the
benefit
of
the
doubt,

requiring
Colbert
to
step
in
and
remind
us
of
the
fire
in
Sotomayor’s
dissent.
Two
very
different
media
hits,
but
a
consistent
reminder
that
the
justices
just
aren’t
willing
to
forge
a
genuine
connection
with
the
public
over
media.
Also,
Ropes
&
Gray

maintains
a
single-tier
partnership
(for
now)
and
Megan
Thee
Stallion
case
introduces
the
world
to

process
servers
taking
things
up
a
notch.

A
punishing
regional
drought
in
2024
makes
the
picture
here
even
clearer:
food,
land,
and
water
systems
have
been
reshaped
in
ways
that
directly
influence
social
cohesion
and
stability.

Southern
Africa
has
faced
repeated
climate
shocks
in
recent
years.
In
places
like
Tsholotsho,
displacement
after
cyclones
collided
with
drought
and
economic
stress.
This
convergence
increased
the
risk
that
small
disagreements
at
water
points
or
grazing
areas
might
create
wider
social
tensions.

Without
a
closer
look,
it
is
difficult
to
understand
how
communities
in
the
southwestern
parts
of
Zimbabwe
(specifically
Tsholotsho’s
wards
5,
6,
8,
and
10)
are
adapting
to
these
crises—as
well
as
climate
change
in
general.
That
is
why
a
research
team
from
the
CGIAR
Climate
Security
Southern
Africa
Hub
spent
two
weeks
in
Tsholotsho
in
late
November
and
early
December
2024.

Team
members
walked
through
transects
with
local
community
members,
leaders
and
agricultural
extension
workers
and
interviewed
displaced
residents
and
their
host
communities.
They
also
spent
time
with
the
San
community,
an
ethnic
minority
group
in
wards
8
and
10,
and
their
neighboring
communities,
tracing
the
dynamics
around
their
co-existence
in
a
climate
crisis
and
their
daily
journeys
through
the
long
routes
necessary
to
obtain
the
water
and
firewood
that
define
survival
in
a
fragile
landscape.

The
research
team
obtained
significant
new
perspectives
by
living
under
the
same
conditions
as
the
people
they
studied.
Living
without
electricity,
with
poor
connectivity,
and
often
improvising
basic
comforts,
the
team
found
that
resource
access
is
more
than
a
question
of
scarcity.
It
is
a
daily
negotiation
shaped
by
structural
inequities,
gender,
ethnicity,
displacement,
and
local
governance.
It
is
also
a
struggle
that
holds
lessons
for
how
climate,
peace,
and
security
intersect
across
Southern
Africa.

Photo Credit: Thea Synnestvedt., Full view of the homestead with house built by the Government of Zimbabwe and its partners for displaced populations in Tsholotsho

Climate
Stress
at
the
Water’s
Edge

One
particular
part
of
this
challenging
landscape
stood
out.
Gariya
Dam
in
Ward
8
represents
both
a
lifeline
and
a
pressure
point
for
the
San
community
and
its
counterparts.

During
the
field
visit,
drought‑strained
supplies
caused
intensified
tensions
here.
Communities
struggled
over
scarce
water
resources,
and
conflicting
interests
between
watering
livestock
and
fishing
emerged.
One
evening,
that
tension
escalated
into
actual
violent
confrontation
between
a
Kalanga
man
and
a
San
man
that
left
one
of
them
seriously
injured
and
in
need
of
urgent
care.

The
incident
also
underscores
a
broader
reality.
When
rainfall
fails
and
buffers
are
thin,
competition
over
access
points
can
become
volatile.
Investments
in
water
governance
and
conflict‑sensitive
resource
management
are
not
side
issues.
Rather,
they
are
central
to
climate
adaptation
and
local
stability.

The
Tsholotsho
field
visit
also
offered
broader
lessons
about
the
vexed
interaction
between
climate
and
social
tensions
in
the
region.

The
first
is
that
climate
adaptation
cannot
be
separated
from
mediation
at
the
water’s
edge.
Water
points
are
both
lifelines
and
flashpoints,
and
without
locally
legitimate
rules,
disputes
can
spiral
quickly.
Strengthening
committees
that
bring
together
customary
leaders,
displaced
households,
and
minority
groups
(including
the
San)
is
one
way
to
turn
shared
access
into
a
foundation
for
cooperation,
rather
than
conflict/competition.

The
second
lesson
is
that
early
warning
and
drought
management
must
be
matched
with
last-mile
delivery.
A
community
may
know
when
water
is
running
out
or
when
livestock
are
at
risk,
but
if
clinics
lack
basic
supplies
or
transport,
small
disputes
can
escalate
into
medical
emergencies
and
deepen
mistrust.
Investing
in
local
transport
links,
stocking
rural
clinics,
and
ensuring
that
alerts
translate
into
rapid
action
can
prevent
grievances
from
hardening
into
wider
insecurity.

Why
This
Matters
Now

Field
research,
such
as
the
project
undertaken
in
Tsholotsho,
can
be
a
raw
and
unpredictable
exercise.
It
demands
that
researchers
move
beyond
their
customary
academic
frameworks
to
share
in
the
rhythms
of
daily
life
in
the
communities
they
study.

Fieldwork
that
respects
local
rhythms
and
builds
trust
can
help
surface
easily
overlooked
pressure
points
(such
as
the
Dam
mentioned
earlier).
Such
insights
allow
stakeholders
to
craft
policies
that
bring
water
governance,
livelihoods
support,
and
basic
services
together
to
reduce
risks.

From
a
research
and
practice
perspective,
the
logistics
of
field
research
matters
as
much
as
the
design
of
the
research
or
program.
It
is
a
space
in
which
gender
dynamics,
privacy,
and
fatigue
are
not
peripheral
concerns;
they
shape
whether
diverse
teams
can
work
effectively
and
whether
women
and
young
researchers
are
able
to
participate
fully.
Planning
for
gender-sensitive
housing,
childcare
support,
and
safe
transport
is
therefore
not
a
luxury;
it
is
an
essential
part
of
building
credible,
resilient
teams
and
programs.

And
the
success
of
fieldwork
heavily
lies
in
community
acceptance
and
trust.
To
demonstrate
this,
we
share
a
personal
recollection
of
our
journey
in
Tsholotsho.
After
our
arrival
in
Tsholotsho,
community
members
welcomed
us
politely,
yet
they
remained
closed
off;
we
could
sense
walls
of
resistance.
Our
breakthrough
came
via
the
most
unexpected
turn
of
events:
a
literal
mud
bath.

Photo Credit: Thea Synnestvedt. CGIAR Climate Security Team members and community members pushing car out of the mud in Tsholotsho, Zimbabwe

During
a
transect
walk,
a
deceptively
small
puddle
held
our
team
hostage
by
stopping
our
4×4
vehicle
in
place.
What
followed
was
an
intense
and
messy
joint
struggle
to
push
it
free.
The
researchers
and
villagers
worked
together,
barefoot,
deep
in
thick
clay,
slipping,
laughing
and
bonding.
Being
drenched
together
was
a
literal
mud
bath
that
proved
to
be
our
initiation
into
the
community.
It
was
the
moment
that
community
welcomed
us
and
invited
our
team
in.

Sometimes,
before
the
real
conversations
begin,
you
need
to
earn
trust
in
unexpected
ways.
That
muddy
afternoon
became
the
joke
of
the
week,
a
shared
memory
that
cemented
a
sense
of
unity. It
is
immersion,
rather
than
observation
alone,
that
ultimately
brings
the
complex
dynamics
of
climate,
peace,
and
security
into
clearer
view.