Why Lawyers Need To Rethink Podcasts As A Strategic Growth Strategy – Above the Law

Two
people
that
actually
should
have
a
microphone.

In
my
22
years
as
an
entrepreneur,
I
have
done
just
about
everything
possible
to
generate
business.
I
have
run
networking
groups,
spoken
at
countless
retreats
and
conferences,
and
leveraged
clients
for
introductions
to
prospective
clients.
On
the
marketing
side,
I
have
invested
in
SEO,
PPC,
written
hundreds
of
articles,
published
five
books,
and
created
more
than
1,000
videos.
With
all
of
that
experience,
nothing,
and
I
mean
nothing,
has
compared
to
the
power
of
my
BE
THAT
LAWYER
podcast.

My
goal
here
is
not
to
convince
every
lawyer
to
start
a
podcast.
It
is
to
explain
why
this
might
be
a
far
more
strategic
growth
tool
than
most
attorneys
realize.
With
more
than
550
episodes
in
less
than
six
years,
and
after
helping
more
than
a
dozen
lawyers
build
successful
shows
of
their
own,
I
can
say
without
hesitation
that
podcasting
creates
value
in
ways
that
traditional
marketing
never
will.

A
clear
example
is
the
reach
it
creates.
My
podcast
videos
now
appear
on
Above
the
Law,
giving
me
a
broader
and
more
credible
audience
than
ever
before.
When
you
build
a
strong
and
consistent
podcast,
respected
platforms
want
to
align
with
your
content.
That
kind
of
association
does
not
happen
when
you
stay
invisible.


Meeting
the
right
people

Getting
meetings
with
high-value
referral
sources
and
true
decision
makers
is
a
challenge
for
many
lawyers.
It
feels
awkward
to
approach
them
and
even
worse
to
pitch
them.
Podcasting
removes
that
tension
completely.
Instead
of
asking
for
business,
you
invite
them
into
a
valuable
conversation.
You
give
them
visibility.
You
make
it
about
them,
not
you.
That
builds
trust
from
the
first
exchange.

A
great
example
is
my
500th
episode
with
John
Morgan
of
Morgan
and
Morgan.
If
I
had
reached
out
to
pitch
coaching,
nothing
would
have
happened.
But
the
invitation
to
appear
as
the
500th
guest
was
too
compelling
to
ignore.
The
interview
was
outstanding,
we
built
a
real
connection,
and
he
later
agreed
to
appear
in
my
latest
book
on
rainmaking.
That
entire
chain
of
events
started
with
a
single
podcast
invitation.


Producing
content
that
never
dries
up

Lawyers
often
struggle
with
content
creation.
Some
stare
at
LinkedIn
wondering
what
to
post
and
end
up
posting
nothing
at
all.
A
podcast
solves
that
instantly.

Every
episode
produces
audio,
long
form
video,
short
form
reels,
and
a
full
transcript.
I
publish
two
episodes
a
week
and
each
one
fuels
weeks
of
additional
marketing.
The
transcripts
become
Blogcasts.
The
reels
become
social
media
assets.
The
long
form
videos
go
to
YouTube
and
other
platforms.
It
is
a
complete
content
engine.

My
most
recent
bestselling
book,

BE
THAT
LAWYER:
101
Top
Rainmakers
Secrets
to
Growing
a
Successful
Law
Practice
,
was
created
from
podcast
transcripts.
One
hundred
rainmakers.
One
hundred
contributors
helping
promote
the
book.
That
is
the
multiplier
effect
a
strong
podcast
provides.


Building
a
brand
that
brings
clients
to
you

I
often
share
the
story
of
my
plane
crash
in
1996
and
how
my
father
connected
me
with
Bob
Clifford,
the
aviation
attorney
he
trusted
most.
That
referral
clearly
explains
the
power
of
branding
and
how
business
can
be
generated
proactively,
with
less
competition
and
effort.

Podcasting
works
the
same
way.
Without
question,
more
new
clients
come
to
me
through
my
podcast
than
through
any
other
marketing
initiative.
Lawyers
listen
to
the
show,
understand
my
approach,
and
trust
me
long
before
we
ever
speak.
By
the
time
they
reach
out,
they
are
already
confident
that
I
am
the
right
coach
for
them.

That
is
the
real
power
of
a
podcast.
Listeners
feel
like
they
know
you.
They
connect
with
your
voice,
your
insights,
and
your
consistency.
Articles
and
videos
can
do
some
of
that,
but
not
at
the
same
level.
Audio
builds
a
deeper
relationship.


The
one
warning
lawyers
need
to
hear

Podcasting
only
works
if
you
do
it
consistently.
Monthly
or
weekly.
No
exceptions.
You
also
need
production
and
marketing
support,
so
the
process
does
not
eat
your
time.
You
are
a
lawyer,
not
a
full-time
media
producer.

The
good
news
is
that
there
are
affordable
solutions.
I
use
automations
and
production
teams
so
that
all
I
need
to
do
is
show
up
for
the
interview.
Everything
else
is
handled.


The
bottom
line

Podcasting
is
one
of
the
most
powerful
and
overlooked
marketing
tools
available
to
lawyers
today.
It
helps
you
meet
the
right
people,
produce
nonstop
content,
and
build
a
brand
that
clients
trust.

If
you
want
guidance
on
how
to
get
started
or
need
introductions
to
reputable
podcast
production
teams,
email
me
at

[email protected]

and
I
will
connect
you
with
resources
that
support
lawyers
at
every
level.




Steve
Fretzin
is
a
bestselling
author,
host
of
the
“Be
That
Lawyer”
podcast,
and
business
development
coach
exclusively
for
attorneys.
Steve
has
committed
his
career
to
helping
lawyers
learn
key
growth
skills
not
currently
taught
in
law
school.
His
clients
soon
become
top
rainmakers
and
credit
Steve’s
program
and
coaching
for
their
success.
He
can
be
reached
directly
by
email
at 
[email protected].
Or
you
can
easily
find
him
on
his
website
at 
www.fretzin.com or
LinkedIn
at 
https://www.linkedin.com/in/stevefretzin.

Are Elite Firms ‘Buying The Demand’ From Top 50 Firms Through High-Profile Lateral Moves? – Above the Law



Ed.
note
:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day
.


The
highest-profit
firms
are
using
their
wallets
and
their
success
to
then
target
the
better-performing
and
higher-generating
partners
from
that
next
group
of
firms.
Essentially,
in
some
sense,
they’re
buying
the
demand
from
the
ones
who
have
it
but
don’t
have
sufficient
profitability
to
pay
those
people.
So
the
demand
is
getting
aggregated
to
the
people
with
the
deep
pockets.





Owen
Burman,
senior
consultant
at
Wells
Fargo’s
Legal
Specialty
Group,
in
comments
given
to
the

American
Lawyer
,
on
the
state
of
the
legal
market
generally.
Burman
noted
that
lateral
activity
was
up
“broadly”
this
year,
with
elite
firms
taking
partners

and
demand

from
the
rest
of
the
top
50
firms.





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.

State Makes Failed Attempt To Protect Workers Since Trump’s NLRB Won’t – Above the Law

New
York
watched
the
federal
government
give
up
on
labor
relations
law
and
tried
to
do
something
about
it.
The
state
lost.
Because
the
law
doesn’t
work
that
way.

Last
week,
Amazon
successfully
secured
a
preliminary
injunction
blocking
New
York
from
enforcing
its
newly
amended
State
Employment
Relations
Act.
SERA
historically
covered
agricultural
and
non-employee
contractors
left
unprotected
by
the
NLRA.
In
September,
New
York
expanded
SERA
to
cover
workers
traditionally
under
federal
jurisdiction

explicitly
citing
the
Trump
administration’s
decision
to
leave
the
NLRB
without
a
quorum.

But
that’s
not
how
the
Supremacy
Clause
works.
When
the
federal
government
announces
its
intention
to
occupy
a
regulatory
field

here,
labor
law
under
the
NLRA

the
states
get
kicked
out
of
the
sandbox.

Garmon

and

Machinists

underscore
this
arrangement,
confirming
that
if
conduct
is
even
“arguably”
protected
or
prohibited
by
Sections
7
or
8,
the
federal
scheme
wins.

In
the
Amazon
case,
Judge
Eric
Komitee
of
the
Eastern
District
of
New
York
did
what
federal
judges
are
supposed
to
do:
he
applied

Garmon

like
it’s
been
applied
for
65
years,
slapped
New
York’s
SERA
amendment
off
the
table,
and
told
the
state
to
go
sit
in
the
corner
while
the
National
Labor
Relations
Board


the
federal
agency
Congress
explicitly
empowered
to
regulate
labor
relations


does
its
job.

Even
though
the
“federal
scheme,”
the
one
that
supposedly
occupies
the
field
so
completely
that
New
York
can’t
regulate
labor
relations
even
when
it
wants
to,
isn’t
a
scheme
at
all
anymore.
It’s
a
smoldering
crater
where
an
independent
NLRB
used
to
be.

From
Judge
Komitee’s
opinion:

In

Garmon
,
the
Supreme
Court
held
that
“[w]hen
an
activity
is
arguably
subject
to
§
7
or
§
8
of
the
[NLRA],
the
States
as
well
as
the
federal
courts
must
defer
to
the
exclusive
competence
of
the
[NLRB].”
359
U.S.
at
245.
This
rule
“prevents
States
not
only
from
setting
forth
standards
of
conduct
inconsistent
with
the
substantive
requirements
of
the
NLRA,
but
also
from
providing
their
own


regulatory
or
judicial


remedies

for
conduct
prohibited
or
arguably
prohibited
by
the
Act.”

Gould
,
475
U.S.
at
286
(emphasis
added).

When
Congress
created
this
system,
it
envisioned
a
functioning,
independent
federal
agency.
It
didn’t
anticipate
an
administration
that
would
fire
board
members
in
defiance
of
statutory
removal
protections,
strip
the
agency
of
its
quorum,
and
then
pledge
to
keep
the
agency
functionally
shut
down
either
through
vacancies
or
stacking
the
Board
with
cronies
hostile
to
executing
its
statutory
mission.
Does
the
federal
government
still
“occupy
the
field”
when
it’s
intentionally
sowing
the
field
with
salt
like
it’s
Carthage?

New
York
knew
that
states
have
no
legal
authority
to
regulate
labor
relations
otherwise
covered
by
the
NLRA
and
would
be
shut
down
by
the
courts
if
they
ever
tried.
That’s
why
its
law,
until
recently,
only
applied
to
workers
excluded
from
the
NLRA.
What
New
York
hoped
was
that
the
unique
circumstances
brought
on
by
the
federal
government
under
Trump
occupying
the
field
in
name
only
would
be
recognized
by
the
courts
as
the
federal
government
abandoning
the
field.
Clever
theory!
Also
a
failed
one.

Judge
Komitee
acknowledged
the
state’s
argument
that
these
“historically
unique
circumstances”
justified
an
exception
to

Garmon
.
He
just
couldn’t
do
anything
about
it,
noting
that
“the
Supreme
Court’s
clear
pronouncements
include
no
‘unique
circumstances’
exception.”

Which
turns
the
Supremacy
Clause
into
both
a
sword
and
shield
in
ways
that
would
give
the
Framers
nightmares.

The
federal
government,
via
the
NLRA,
claims
exclusive
authority
by
occupying
the
space.
Then
the
federal
government,
via
the
executive
branch
acting
unilaterally,
retreats
from
that
space.
And
states
can’t
fill
the
vacuum
because
the
federal
government
is
still
technically
“there”

even
if
they’re
only
“there”
the
same
way
a
condemned
building
is
still
technically
there.
But
it’s
a
sword
and
shield
with
a
separation
of
powers
twist
since
the
Supremacy
Clause
impliedly
gets
its
power
from
the
idea
that
a
federal
law
is
passed
by
Congress
and
signed
by
the
president,
while
in
this
case
the
executive
branch
is
acting
alone
in
repurposing
the
law.

Shouldn’t
that
change
the
analysis?
Probably…
but
that’s
not
a
set
of
circumstances
that
federal
district
courts
are
really
equipped
to
address.

Because
doctrine
wasn’t
built
to
handle
bad
faith.
No
one
thought
enough
to
add
a
footnote
to

Garmon

about
a

Twilight
Zone

scenario
where
a
future
executive
might
seize
control
over
putatively
independent
agencies
and
then
either
gut
them
or
weaponize
them
to
dismantle
the
very
laws
they
are
statutorily
put
there
to
enforce.

So
states
are
constitutionally
barred
from
protecting
workers,
even
when
the
federal
government
refuses
to
do
so,
because
the
federal
government
keeps
a
statute
on
the
books
promising
that
it
might
theoretically
start
protecting
them
again
someday.

The
constitutional
crisis
isn’t
that
the
judge
got
this
wrong.
It’s
that
he
got
it
right.


(Full
opinion
available
on
the
next
page…)




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
.

Is Redistricting ‘Retarded’? – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Andrew
Harnik/Getty
Images)

In
his
usual
elegant
and
scholarly
way,
President
Donald
Trump
took
to
Truth
Social
to
criticize
Somalian
refugees:

[H]undreds
of
thousands
of
refugees
from
Somalia
are
completely
taking
over
the
once
great
State
of
Minnesota.
Somalian
gangs
are
roving
the
streets
looking
for
‘prey’
as
our
wonderful
people
stay
locked
in
their
apartments
and
houses
hoping
against
hope
that
they
will
be
left
alone.
The
seriously
retarded
Governor
of
Minnesota,
Tim
Walz,
does
nothing,
either
through
fear,
incompetence,
or
both.

Trump
thus
blames
hundreds
of
thousands
of
refugees
for
the
conduct
of
a
few
bad
apples. 
That’s
wrong!

Mike
Bohacek,
an
Indiana
State
Senator,
was
appropriately
outraged.
He
notified
the
world
on
Facebook
of
how
he
would
retaliate
for
Trump’s
disgraceful
statement:

Many
of
you
have
asked
my
position
on
redistricting.
I
have
been
an
unapologetic
advocate
for
people
with
intellectual
disabilities
since
the
birth
of
my
second
daughter.
Those
of
you
that
don’t
know
me
or
my
family
might
not
know
that
my
daughter
has
Down
Syndrome.
This
is
not
the
first
time
our
president
has
used
these
insulting
and
derogatory
references
and
his
choices
of
words
have
consequences.
I
will
be
voting
NO
on
redistricting;
perhaps
he
can
use
the
next
10
months
to
convince
voters
that
his
policies
and
behavior
deserve
a
congressional
majority.

Let
me
get
this
straight.

Nearly
10
years
ago,
the
world
learned
that
Donald
Trump
had
said: “[W]hen
you’re
a
star,
they
let
you
do
it.
You
can
do
anything.  Grab
’em
by
the
pussy.
You
can
do
anything.”

Bohacek,
naturally,
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

Trump
said,
of
Mexican
immigrants,
condemning
them
all
as
a
group,
“They’re
bringing
drugs.
They’re
bringing
crime.
They’re
rapists.”

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

After
the
2017
white-supremacist
rally
in
Charlottesville,
Virginia,
Trump
said
that
“there
were
very
fine
people
on
both
sides.”

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

Trump
encouraged
a
mob
to
attack
the
Capitol
Building,
thus
interfering
with
the
peaceful
transfer
of
power
after
the
2020
presidential
election.

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

A
jury
found
Trump
liable
for
sexual
assault.

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this.
Trump’s
my
guy!

A
different
jury
convicted
Trump
of
34
felonies.

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

Trump
pardoned
the
entire
group
of
January
6
rioters,
including
Enrique
Tarrio,
who
had
been
convicted
of
seditious
conspiracy
and
sentenced
to
22
years
in
prison.

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

Trump
imposed,
and
removed,
and
imposed
again,
assorted
tariffs,
increasing
costs
and
crippling
the
ability
of
American
businesses
to
plan
for
the
future.

Bohacek
saw
nothing
wrong
with
this. 
Trump’s
my
guy!

Trump
said
that
Tim
Walz
was
retarded.

The
very
nerve! 
The
outrage! 
By
God,
I’ll
oppose
Trump’s
effort
to
redistrict
in
Indiana
because
he’s
implicitly
insulted
my
child
who
has
Down
Syndrome!

Really? 
For
some
inexplicable
reason,
you
could
ignore
all
of
Trump’s
other
offenses,
insults,
and
criminality? 
But
this
particular
insult

actually
mild
by
comparison

now
sets
you
off?

And
you’re
going
to
vote
against
redistricting
because
Trump
said
something
implicitly
insulting
to
people
with
Down
Syndrome?

If
I
personally
were
a
legislator
thinking
about
redistricting,
I’d
decide
whether
redistricting
was
right
or
wrong. 
If
redistricting
was
good
for
Indiana
and
the
rest
of
the
country,
then
I’d
vote
for
it

whether
or
not
the
president
was
a
jerk. 
And
if
redistricting
was
partisan
hackery
that
would
hurt
Indiana
and
the
rest
of
the
country,
then
I’d
vote
against
it

whether
or
not
the
president
was
a
jerk.

Whether
the
president
had
implicitly
insulted
my
child
simply
wouldn’t
be
in
the
calculus
because,
as
a
legislator,
I’d
be
sworn
to
protect
my
constituents.

So
Bohacek’s
Facebook
post
was
a
political
stunt,
perhaps
meant
to
draw
attention
to
the
cause
of
Down
Syndrome,
or
perhaps
meant
to
draw
attention
to
Mike
Bohacek
personally,
or
perhaps
to
achieve
something
else. 
But
the
Facebook
post
had
nothing
to
do
with
the
propriety
of
a
vote
on
redistricting.

Remarkably,
the
media
fell
for
it. 
The
media
reported
Bohacek’s
nonsense
as
though
Trump’s
insulting
choice
of
words
actually
cost
him
a
vote
in
favor
of
redistricting
in
Indiana.

Media: 
Shame
on
you. 
This
was
a
publicity
stunt,
and
you
fell
for
it,
giving
Bohacek
the
publicity
he
craved.

And
Bohacek: 
Shame
on
you. 
What
you
wrote
on
Facebook
was
nonsensical.

In
fact,
I’d
almost
be
tempted
to
say: 
Mike
Bohacek,
you’re 
.
.
.
well
.
.
.
very
foolish.






Mark Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
later
oversaw
litigation,
compliance
and
employment
matters
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of 
The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law
 and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strategy
 (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at 
[email protected].

New forms of commercial agriculture on A2 land reform farms in Mvurwi, Zimbabwe


There
is
reliable
rainfall,
good
soils,
excellent
connections
to
markets,
an
available,
skilled
workforce
and
an
impressive
inherited
infrastructure
of
small
dams,
roads
and
farm
buildings.
However,
once
again
A2
farms
have
struggled
over
the
last
25
years,
although
again
with
much
variation
and
some
important
innovations
in
land
use
and
investment.


Investing
in
farming

Across
our
sites
there
has
been
significant
investment
in
as
well
as
rehabilitation
of
existing
infrastructure.
The
Mvurwi
area
has
around
1000
small
dams
built
during
the colonial
era
to
support
white
agriculture
,
and
these
are
crucial
for
irrigated
production.
Many
are
being
used
as
irrigation
expands,
but
challenges
of
siltation
and
environmental
degradation
through
chrome
mining
has
become
an
issue
of
late.
With
the
new
farms
being
subdivisions
of
often
large
estates,
there
has
been
a
need
to
drill
boreholes
and
extend
pipework
to
standing
water,
and
there
has
been
a
significant
expansion
of
horticultural
production
across
A2
farms.

Case
1:
MM,
Pembi
Chase


I
was
born
in
1995
in
Mvurwi.
I
inherited
this
plot
from
my
late
parents
who
acquired
the
land
in
2002.
My
father
was
a
farm
manager
in
Concession
where
he
also
grew
up.
He
passed
away
in
2012
and
my
mother
passed
away
in
2020.
When
my
parents
were
still
alive,
we
used
to
grow
tobacco,
maize
and
sweet
potatoes.
Following
my
mother’s
death,
I
decided
to
abandon
tobacco
because
it’s
such
a
‘jealousy’
crop
(fodya
ine
shanje).
Instead,
I
ventured
into
horticulture.
As
young
people,
we
prefer
to
engage
in
horticulture,
while
older
people
prefer
tobacco
farming.
I
grow
water
melons
and
tomatoes.
This
year,
I
purchased
a
solar-powered
submersible
pump
and
two
solar
panels.
Using
proceeds
from
horticulture,
I
have
managed
to
educate
my
siblings.
I
was
born
in
a
family
of
three

two
boys
and
one
girl.
My
sister
(born
2000)
just
completed
her
degree
in
Business
and
Industrial
Economics
from
the
University
of
Zimbabwe,
and
my
younger
brother
is
doing
Form
2
in
Mvurwi
town.
 

Despite
the
growth
of
horticulture,
the
core
commodity
in
this
area
remains tobacco.
Nearly
all
A2
farmers
grow
tobacco,
some
in
large
quantities.
The
amount
of
tobacco
production
in
Mvurwi
has
sky-rocketed
across
A1
and
A2
areas,
and
there
are
now
14
tobacco
auction
floors
in
the
town.
This
has
been
driven
by
investment
through
contracting
companies,
ranging
from
the
big
players
like
Tian
Ze
(Chinese)
and
Mashonaland
Tobacco
Company
(subsidiary
of
Alliance
One,
a
global
conglomerate)
to
an
array
of
small
operators,
with
a
total
of 32
players
 operating
nationally.
The contractors supply
inputs,
finance
for
labour,
fuel
for
curing
(coal)
and
offer
guaranteed
markets.
Given
the
scale
of
operation
most
A2
farmers
cannot
afford
to
self-finance
fully,
so
reliance
on
contracting
is
critical.

Tobacco
requires
good
infrastructure,
including
irrigation
for
seedlings,
barns
for
curing,
and
a
skilled
workforce,
especially
when
grading
and
selling.
Investments
have
been
significant
in
new
barns,
and
for
some
more
sophisticated
fuel-efficient
rocket
barns.
In
addition
to
houses
built
on
the
A2
farms,
the
array
of
new
or
repurposed
farm
buildings
including
curing
barns,
sheds
and
so
on,
across
Mvurwi
is
impressive.
This
is
witness
to
the
huge
tobacco
boom
driven
from
the
land
reform
areas,
with
this
last
season
resulting
in
Zimbabwe’s
biggest
ever
tobacco
harvest
of
350,000
tonnes.


Mobilising
labour
for
commercial
agriculture

Access
to
labour
is
a
continuous
complaint
amongst
A2
farmers
in
Mvurwi.
Despite
many
having
resident
labour
in former
compounds
 nearby,
mobilising
the
former
farmworkers
for
the
level
of
salary
being
paid
(as
little
as
US$3.50
per
day)
can
be
challenging.

Many
farmworkers
prefer
to
focus
on
their
own
small
plots
that
they
were
allocated
(some
before,
more
after
land
reform),
where
on
even
just
a
hectare
of
land
they
can
make
good
money
from
tobacco
given
their
significant
agronomic
skills
in
tobacco
production.
Many
also
rent
in
land
to
expand
production

including
from
A2
farmers,
turning
the
tables
in
terms
of
land
use.
The
result
is
that
the
captive
resident
workforce
that
existed
for
former
white
farmers
is
often
no
longer
available.

At
certain
times,
tobacco
production
requires
maybe
several
hundred
labourers
on
an
A2
farm,
so
farm
owners
must
seek
labour
from
further
afield,
including
the
A1
areas
and
the
communal
areas
in
Chiweshe,
Muzarabani
and
Guruve.
However,
agriculture
must
now
compete
with
mining
in
Mvurwi,
especially
since
the
chrome
boom
that
started
in
March
2024.
Large
numbers
of
people
flock
to
the
Great
Dyke
to
dig
and
then
process
chrome
for
sale
to
Chinese,
South
Africans
and
other
traders.

Some
A2
farmers
have
begun
to
seek
new
solutions
that
replicate
to
some
extent
the
arrangements
that
existed
before
when
white
farmers
controlled
the
land
and
labour
in
a
system
of
paternalistic
and
exploitative
domestic
government
’.
In
order
to
secure
reliable
labour,
a
core
group
is
created
on
the
farm,
with
tenancy
arrangements
providing
them
housing
and
small
farm
plots,
but
with
a
closer
engagement
(and
control
by)
the
farm
owner
than
under
the
current
compound
system
where
former
farmworker
families
have
no
obligations
towards
the
new
landowners.

Case
2:
MM,
Pembi
Chase


I
have
two
sisters
who
are
single
women
who
live
on
the
farm
with
their
children.
These
women
are
not
my
relatives.
They
are
from
Muzarabani.
The
arrangement
is
that
they
provide
labour
for
me
in
exchange
for
accessing
land
to
farm.
However,
a
rule
of
thumb
here
is
that
the
area
should
not
exceed
2
ha.
These
two
women
have
access
to
2
ha
of
land
between
them
in
return
to
providing
me
with
farm
labour. 
 


Financing
agriculture

The
lack
of
access
to
finance
is
a
continuous
refrain
from
farmers
in
Mvurwi.
Without
funds,
investment
in
infrastructure
and
annual
financing
of
crops
is
impossible.
In
the
past,
white
farmers
were
offered
generous
loans
through
the
banks,
and
in
the
early
days,
promises
were
made
to
new
A2
farmers
that
the
government
would
support
them
too.
This
has
not
been
forthcoming
and
the
opportunity
to
borrow
against
land
assets
has
been
impossible
without
an
agreement
between
the
banks
and
the
government
on
the
wording
of
the 99-year
lease
,
which
were
to
be
issued
to
A2
farm
owners
but
never
materialised
(bar
a
few
high-profile
media
cases).
The
long
litany
of
failure
to
support
A2
farmers
has
meant
that
potentials
have
often
not
been
realised.

Command
Agriculture
was
supposed
to
offer
a
solution

a
loan
arrangement
from
the
government
with
logistics
supported
by
the
military
and
with
backing
from
the
highest
level.
This
was
the
flagship
programme
from
2016
and
ran
for
around
four
years.
As
has
been
extensively
discussed
(see earlier
blog
),
the
Command
Agriculture
programme
was
controversial,
as
it
was
open
to
capture
by
elites
and
became
a
site
of
selective
patronage.
Only
a
few
benefited,
and
even
in
the
high
potential
area
of
Mvurwi
where
the
programme
was
supposed
to
have
been
concentrated,
the
percentage
of
A2
farmers
who
received
support

mostly
for
maize
growing
with
supplementary
irrigation

was
minimal.
Many
of
these
recipients
complained
that
inputs
were
late
or
in
the
wrong
quantities
and
combinations
and
that
the
programme
only
really
benefited
the
real
elite
who
could
jump
the
queue
and
gain
the
full
package
with
very
little
expectation
that
it
would
be
paid
back.

Due
to
high
default
rates
and
a
shift
in
priority,
the
Command
Agriculture
programme
(and
its
many
spin-offs)
was
wound
down
in
late
2019.
Now
farmers
must
seek
private
finance
to
support
their
operations.
CBZ
offers
bank
loans,
but
against
collateral,
including
houses
in
town.
Some
with
such
assets
have
been
given
loans,
but
agriculture
is
risky,
and
default
is
likely.
Many
have
suffered,
even
with
town
homes
being
reclaimed
by
the
bank.
This
has
resulted
in
much
stress,
and
in
one
case
a
suicide
of
a
farmer
in
Pembi
Chase
near
Mvurwi
after
the
farmer
had
used
a
son-in-law’s
house
as
collateral.

Another
option
is
to
rely
on contract
farming
,
which
is
available
mostly
for
tobacco.
Getting
a
contract
for
a
limited
area
(a
few
hectares)
allows
farmers
to
spread
the
inputs
to
other
areas,
but
the
contractors
require
high
quality
leaf,
and
some
farmers
fail
to
supply,
with
defaults
again
being
common.
 Combining
contracting
with
self-financing
is
the
most
common
strategy
as
risks
are
spread
and
at
least
some
of
the
area
cropped
has
a
guaranteed
market
through
the
contract
arrangement.

Other
contracting
arrangements
are
with
seed
companies
(for
maize,
wheat
and
soya),
but
these
have
even
more
challenging
requirements
so
that
the
seed
is
pure,
and
this
requires
irrigation
and
significant
management
and
labour.
Many
A2
farmers,
especially
those
absent
from
the
farm,
fail
to
comply
with
the
stringent
requirements,
and
it
is
the
joint
venture
farmers
with
capital
who
can
benefit
from
these
arrangements.


The
growing
value
of
land:
land
markets,
crime
and
violence

Due
to
the
demand
for
land
and
the
high
potentials
there
has
been
a
massive
growth
in
land
markets
in
the
A2
areas
of
Mvurwi.
There
is
a
lot
of
leasing,
borrowing,
illegal
selling/purchase
and
many
joint
ventures.
There
are
a
number
of
different
types
of
such
arrangements,
with
many
different
actors
involved,
as
will
be
discussed
in
the
next
blog.

The
high
value
of
land
reform
areas
in
Mvurwi,
increasing
through
these
processes
of
external
investment,
means
that
these
farms
are
subject
to
significant
levels
of
theft
and
other
crime,
sometimes
violent
with
a
number
of
murders
having
been
recorded
in
the
last
season
following
tobacco
sales.

This
has
been
a
growing
concern
in
the
last
few
years,
making
it
imperative
that
farm
owners
are
frequently
present
and
invest
in
the
necessary
security.
Thefts
of
produce,
equipment,
fencing,
livestock
and
other
assets
is
a
frequent
challenge,
as
A2
farms
are
surrounded
by
other
communal
areas,
A1
farms,
small
towns
and
compounds
with
many
former
farmworkers
live
on
these
farms
but
without
any
direct
relationship
with
the
owner.


Gender
and
generational
changes:
questions
about
land
ownership

As
in
our
other
study
sites,
many
of
the
original
owners
of
the
farms
have
now
died,
leaving
wives,
sons
and
daughters
(or
other
relatives)
to
manage
the
farm.
The
arrangements
are
often
complex,
with
different
people
having
a
stake
in
the
farm,
with
divided
responsibilities
and
accountabilities.
Disputes
frequently
arise,
resulting
in
confusions
that
disrupt
farming.

A2
farmers’
children,
perhaps
especially
in
Mvurwi,
where
there
is
a
greater
preponderance
of
‘elites’,
are
often
reluctant
to
take
over
farms.
They
are
living
abroad
and
are
happy
to
continue
to
support
parents
when
they
are
alive,
but
when
they
pass
on,
what
happens
to
the
land
is
a
big
question.
As
in
other
areas,
many
women
are
reluctant
to
engage
in
A2
farm
production,
as
they
have
social
reproduction
obligations
in
other
places,
notably
the
town
home
and
may
be
involved
in
other
income
earning
activities,
including
employment.

Case
3:
CM,
Leeuws
Rust


83-year-old
CM
is
a
widow
who
lives
in
Concession.
Her
late
husband,
a
war
veteran,
acquired
a
92ha
A2
plot
in
2002
in
Leeuws
Rust.
 At
the
time,
he
was
a
farm
manager
at
the
farm.
However,
he
passed
away
in
2003,
soon
after
acquiring
the
farm.
Since
then,
the
farm,
had
been
standing
idle,
while
CM
and
the
children
continued
to
live
in
Concession
town
while
children
attend
school.
In
2016,
CM
and
her
sons
decided
to
deploy
a
‘caretaker’
to
stay
on
the
farm
as
a
strategy
to
hold
on
to
the
land.
The
‘caretaker’,
whose
wife’s
mother
shared
a
similar
‘Nzou’
totem
with
CM,
now
lives
on
the
plot
with
his
family.
The
caretaker
is
originally
from
Rusape.
The
arrangement
is
that
he
does
his
own
farming
in
return
for
looking
after
the
plot.
According
to
the
caretaker,
the
farm
was
“just
bush”
with
no
homestead.
He
had
to
build
two
pole
and
dagga
houses,
which
he
still
lives
in
today.
CM
is
now
old,
and
continues
to
live
in
town.
His
two
sons
are
also
engaging
in
‘mushikashika’
in
Concession
and
Bindura.
The
family
has
since
sold
30
ha
of
the
land
to
an
urban
investor
from
Harare
who
is
engaging
in
cattle
fattening,
while
renting
out
the
rest
of
the
grazing
land
to
another
cattle
farmer.
  

Case
4:
TC,
Balwick


The
late
war
veteran,
TC
acquired
an
A2
plot
in
2001.
Upon
acquiring
the
farm,
he
moved
with
his
wife
to
the
farm.
With
all
their
children
working
in
towns,
TC
stayed
with
his
‘muzukuru’
(sister’s
son)
who
helped
him
with
farming.
In
2021,
TC
died
due
to
COVID-19
and
his
widow
returned
to
their
original
home
in
Chiweshe.
However,
the
muzukuru
still
lives
on
the
farm
with
his
wife
and
young
children.
They
survive
on
‘maricho’.
Currently,
the
household
has
a
joint
venture
with
a
young
white
Zimbabwean.
The
household
is
also
leasing
out
grazing
to
a
cattle
farmer
who
also
employs
his
‘muzukuru’.
TC’s
son,
who
is
now
responsible
for
managing
the
farm,
lives
in
Harare.

The
assumption
of
the
ideal
farming
operation
being
led
by
a
middle-aged,
active
male
farming
head
who
can
lead
an
agricultural
business
(getting
finance,
managing
labour,
organising
markets,
negotiating
joint
ventures/rentals
and
so
on)
is
becoming
a
problematic
one
today.
Wives,
children
and
others
are
not
able
or
willing
to
comply
with
this
model.
This
is
of
course
what
happened
in
white
owned
farms
before,
but
such
farms
could
be
sold
on
if
the
family
was
not
able
to
continue
to
manage
it,
but
this
is
currently
illegal
in
the
land
reform
areas.
For
this
reason,
joint
ventures
are
a
good
solution

coming
in
a
whole
variety
of
forms
(see
next
blog).

Surprisingly,
few
A2
farms
are
being
subdivided,
unlike
the
pattern
we
see
in
A1
areas.
In
part
this
is
reluctance
by
sons/daughters
but
there
are
other
hurdles,
as
recognising
new
land
holders
with
A2
farms,
with
new
offer
letters
is
challenging,
requiring
negotiation
with
land
officers
(and
bribes).
The
legality
of
such
subdivisions
is
also
questioned,
as
officially
A2
farms
(as
A1)
are
supposed
to
retain
the
expected
size
for
commercial
production.
Some
farmers
however
have
subdivided
successfully,
suggesting
one
future
trajectory
for
such
areas,
as
seen
in former
African
Purchase
Areas
.

Without
transferrable
leases
and
with
uncertainty
around
the
new titling
programme
,
there
is
an
impasse
in
how
in
the
longer-term
land
will
be
managed
and
transferred.
A2
farmers
we
spoke
to
sounded
enthusiastic
about
the
idea
of
getting
title,
but
worried
both
about
the
expense
and
the
length
of
time
it
would
take
and
the
arduous
bureaucratic
requirements.
Those
in
joint
ventures
might
lean
on
their
business
partner
to
facilitate
the
process,
but
even
those
who
have
got
started
on
the
paperwork
are
uncertain
as
to
where
it
will
lead.
Lawyers
have
been
employed,
but
they
too
are
unclear
about
the
legal
status
of
such
titles
and
whether
they
can
be
upheld

and
in
turn
transferred.
Others
are
investing
in
the
titling
process
because
of
fears
of
grabs
of
land
from
urban
expansion
or
new
investments
in
tourist
areas,
golf
courses
and
so
on.
They
hope
to
protect
their
land
or
potentially
cash
in,
but
one
whose
land
has
been
eyed
up
for
a
major
high-profile
‘smart
city’
investment
has
not
heard
anything
about
the
title
application
over
many
months,
suspecting
it
is
being
held
up
by
others
with
interest
in
the
land.


A
policy
vacuum

Perhaps
especially
in
Mvurwi
amongst
our
study
sites,
in
the
future
we
can
expect
more
wrangles
over
land
ownership,
either
through
inheritance
disputes
or
because
of
uncertainties
around
land
titling.
In
the
absence
of
a
full
land
market
supported
by
a
clear land
administration
system
,
we
can
expect
the
number
of
joint
ventures
to
continue
to
expand.
The
result
will
be
more
and
more
of
the
land,
even
if
notionally
owned
by
land
reform
beneficiaries,
will
be
run
by
external
investors,
whether
former
white
farmers,
black
business
people
or
Chinese
investors.

The
lack
of
clarity
about
ownership
and
how
land
is
used,
as
well
as
the
on-going
challenges
of
inheritance,
may
continue
to
disrupt
the
clear
potentials
for
agricultural
growth
in
this
area,
which
we
can
clearly
see
across
a
number
of
our
sample
farms,
whether
run
by
land
reform
farmers
or
in
partnership
with
investors.
Potentials
are
being
held
back
by
the
failure
to
have
an
effective
land
administration
system
with
transferable
land
ownership
arrangements
(leases
or
titles),
along
with
a
lack
of
cheap
finance
for
agriculture
and
challenges
with
labour.
All
these
areas
are
amenable
to
policy
intervention,
yet
the
only
highly
visible
effort
surrounds
titling,
which
is
occurring
in
a
wider
policy
vacuum
on
agricultural
development,
and
with
much
suspicion
about
motives
as
well
as
questions
around
implementation
being
raised.


This
post
was
written
by Ian
Scoones
 and Tapiwa
Chatikobo
 and
first
appeared
on Zimbabweland
.

Post
published
in:

Agriculture

Clio Reveals Leadership Roles for Former vLex Executives Following $1 Billion Acquisition

Following
the
completion
of
its

historic
$1
billion
acquisition
of
vLex

last
month,
Clio
has
announced
the
leadership
positions
for
key
former
vLex
executives
joining
the
company.

The
appointments
are:


Lluis
Faus

will
serve
as
strategic
advisor
and
interim
chief
content
officer.
As
the
former
CEO
of
vLex,
which
he
and
his
brother
founded
in
2000,
he
brings
decades
of
experience
in
legal
research
and
content
innovation
to
his
new
role
overseeing
Clio’s
content
strategy.


Ed
Walters

takes
on
the
position
of
vice
president,
legal
innovation
and
strategy.
Walters
was
chief
strategy
officer
at
vLex
and,
before
that,
cofounder
and
CEO
of
Fastcase,
which
he
founded
in
1999.
He
will
focus
on
driving
innovation
across
Clio’s
expanded
product
portfolio.


Angel
Faus

joins
Clio’s
executive
roster
as
vice
president
of
engineering.
As
cofounder
of
vLex,
he
had
been
its
chief
technology
officer.
He
will
now
apply
his
technical
expertise
to
integrating
vLex’s
technology
with
Clio’s
platform.


Phil
Rosenthal

becomes
head
of
bar
and
academic
partnerships,
continuing
his
work
building
relationships
with
bar
associations
and
law
schools,
as
he
previously
did
at
both
vLex
and
Fastcase.
Rosenthal
was
cofounder
of
Fastcase
and
its
president
and
chairman.

The
acquisition,
which
closed
in
November,
combined
Clio’s
practice
management
platform
with
vLex’s
legal
research
capabilities,
creating
what
Clio
CEO
Jack
Newton
described
as
an
integrated
solution
spanning
the
entire
legal
workflow.

The
deal
was
accompanied
by
a
$500
million
Series
G
funding
round
that
valued
Clio
at
$5
billion.

As
I
reported
at
the
time
of
the
acquisition’s
completion,
the
combination
brings
together
Clio’s
150,000
customers
with
vLex’s
research
platform
used
by
millions
of
legal
professionals
globally.

Alabama Lawyer Accused Of Trying To Murder Her Husband Three Times With Fentanyl – Above the Law

Well,
here’s
a
sentence
you
never
want
to
read
about
someone
who
took
an
oath
to
uphold
the
law:
An
Alabama
attorney
has
been
charged
with
three
counts
of
attempted
murder
for
allegedly
trying
to
kill
her
husband
with
fentanyl.
Not
once.
Not
twice.
But

three

separate
times.

The
attorney
in
question
is
Sara
Baker,
who
has
now
been
hit
with
the
sort
of
charge
list
that
reads
like
someone
shook
the
criminal
code
and
let
everything
fall
out:
conspiracy
to
commit
murder,
attempted
murder
(in
triplicate),
distribution
of
a
controlled
substance,
elder
abuse,
and
domestic
violence.

Authorities
say
Baker
began
plotting
in
September,
despite
being
married
to
her
husband

former
Auburn
football
player
Doyle
Baker

for
almost
30
years.
Doyle
had
suffered
a
stroke
a
few
years
ago,
and
Sara

was
his
caregiver
,
yet
according
to

court
documents,

she
served
her
husband
fentanyl
“for
a
purpose
other
than
lawful
medical
or
therapeutic
treatment.”

The
attempts
reportedly
came
in
quick
succession,
on
September
4,
September
12,
and
September
20.
And
despite
everything,
Doyle
survived,
though
prosecutors
say
he
suffered
“physical
impairment”
as
a
result.

Even
veteran
Alabama
attorneys
are
stunned.
As
fellow
lawyer

Will
League
put
it
,
“It’s
just
sad

that
someone
has
gone
that
far
and
is
willing
to
go
to
those
lengths
to
do
something,
you
know,
especially
when
they
know
all
the
consequences
of
the
laws.”
Which
is
polite
Southern-lawyer
speak
for:

What
in
the
actual
hell?

But
there’s
an
extra
lawyerly
twist.
One
of
Sara
Baker’s
clients,
Felisha
Nichole
Cofield,
was
charged
with
tampering
after
allegedly
swallowing
fentanyl
she
thought
might
tie
her
to
the
plot.
Cofield
is
listed
as
a
witness
in
the
criminal
complaint
against
Baker.




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].

Biglaw Appellate Attorney Falls To His Death While Mountain Climbing – Above the Law

(Image
via
Getty)

We
have
some
unfortunate
news
to
report
out
of
the
Washington,
D.C.
legal
community,
where
an
appellate
attorney
at
King
&
Spalding
recently
passed
away.

Kellam
Conover,
44,
was
based
out
of
the
firm’s
Washington,
D.C.,
office,
where
he
worked
as
of
counsel
before
he
died.
The
Stanford
Law
graduate
was
on
the
trip
of
a
lifetime
to
New
Zealand,
where
he
aimed
to
climb
the
region’s
highest
mountain.
According
to

Climbing
Magazine
,
Conover
and
his
guide,
Thomas
Vialletet,
were
roped
together
when
they
fell
to
their
deaths.
It
is
unclear
what
caused
the
fall.

Mark
Jensen,
managing
partner
of
King
&
Spalding’s
Washington,
D.C.,
office,
expressed
his
grief
in
an
email
to
the

American
Lawyer
,
saying
the
firm
was
“deeply
saddened
by
the
loss
of
Kellam
Conover.”
Here
are
some
additional
details
from
his
message:

“Kellam
made
his
mark
here
as
a
gifted
lawyer,
respected
colleague,
and
wonderful
friend
with
a
bright
future,”
Jensen
said.

“He
will
be
sorely
missed,”
he
said.
“We
send
our
condolences
to
Kellam’s
family
and
friends
on
their
unfathomable
loss.”

We
here
at
Above
the
Law
would
like
to
extend
our
condolences
to
Kellam
Conover’s
family,
friends,
and
colleagues
during
this
difficult
time.


King
&
Spalding
Appellate
Attorney
Dies
While
Climbing
New
Zealand’s
Tallest
Mountain

[American
Lawyer]





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.

Biglaw Firm Gives Associates The Best Thing To Mull Over: Bonuses! – Above the Law

As
we
roll
over
into
December,
the
thanks
giving
(small
t)
continues
with
bonus
announcements.
We’re
passing
on
some
great
news
announced
to
associates
at
Sheppard
Mullin;
y’all
are
getting
paid
extra!
Business
is
doing
well

the
firm
raked
in
a
respectable
$1,213,328,000
gross
revenue
in
2024
according
to
Am
Law

and
sharing
some
of
the
surplus
is
a
phenomenal
way
to
reward
everyone
for
their
hard
work.

Here’s
the
firm’s
bonus
and
special
bonus
scale:

Nice
to
see
that
the
firm
is
rewarding
the
associates
who
worked
beyond
the
base
2000
hours
with
even
more
bonus
bucks.
The
money
will
be
paid
out
on
January
16th.

To
everyone
at
Sheppard
Mullin,
congrats
on
the
cash!
You
can
buy
something
nice
for
yourself,
for
someone
else,
or
give
it
all
to
Sallie
Mae.
The
choice
is
yours!

We
like
hearing
about
bonuses
almost
as
much
as
you
enjoy
spending
them.
As
soon
as
your
firm’s
memo
comes
out,
please email
it
to
us

(subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Bonus”)
or
text
us
(646-820-8477).
Please
include
the
memo
if
available.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
send
it
via
text
or
email
if
you
don’t
want
to
forward
the
original
PDF
or
Word
file.

And
if
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Salary
&
Bonus
Alerts,
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
If
you
previously
signed
up
for
the
bonus
alerts,
you
don’t
need
to
do
anything.
You’ll
receive
an
email
notification
within
minutes
of
each
bonus
announcement
that
we
publish.



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.

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

In
case
anyone
was
wondering
whether
state
bars
would
step
up
to
hold
anyone
accountable
if
the
Trump
administration
sends
cronies
to
cosplay
as
U.S.
Attorneys
and
fire
career
prosecutors
so
they
can
file
bad
faith
criminal
cases,
the
Virginia
State
Bar
has
helpfully
answered:
LOL,
no.

Last
month,
the

Campaign
for
Accountability

filed

ethics
complaints

in
both
Virginia
and
Florida
against
Lindsey
Halligan,
the
insurance
lawyer
serving
as
the
Interim-But-Not-Legally-Interim
U.S.
Attorney
for
the
Eastern
District
of
Virginia,
alleging
she’d
violated
multiple
rules
supposedly
governing
members
of
the
bar.
In
response,
Virginia
sent
a
polite
letter
explaining
that
it
would
pass
on
looking
into
allegations
of
a
pattern
of
misconduct
and
would
rather
leave
it
to
the
courts.
“Whether
criminal
indictments
were
obtained
through
material
misrepresentations
of
fact
and
done
for
political
purposes
falls
within
the
authority
of
the
court
to
determine
and
not
this
office.”

Folks…
your
professional
gatekeepers
in
2025!

“If,
when
confronted
with
actions
as
egregious
as
Ms. Halligan’s,
a
state
bar,
which
allegedly
policies
the
conduct
of
its
members,
claims
it
can
do
nothing
more
than
reiterate
the
findings
of
a
court,
what
purpose
does
it
serve?”
asked
Campaign
for
Accountability
CEO
Michelle
Kuppersmith.
“The
courts
have
been
doing
their
job
in
recognizing
misconduct
when
they
see
it.
State
bars
must
do
the
same.”

In
fairness
to
the
Virginia
State
Bar,
the
most
egregious
allegations

the
ones
involving
Halligan’s
illegal
actions
as

a
squatter
pretending
to
be
a
U.S.
Attorney

and
her

shady
effort
to
ramrod
through
a
falsified
indictment

in
a
desperate
bid

to
beat
the
statute
of
limitations


may
well
have
been
properly
within
the
court’s
purview.
While
every
adult
with
a
frontal
lobe
already
suspected
that
the
judge
would
find
that
Halligan’s
misadventures
compromised
the
cases,
there’s
nothing
wrong
with
the
state
bar
exercising
prudence
and
steering
clear
of

those
allegations

until
the
court
acted.
For
the
record,
the
federal
judge
presiding
over
these
matters
has
since
confirmed
that
Halligan
possessed
no
more
authority
than
“any
private
citizen
off
the
street

attorney
or
not”
and
kicked
the
indictments
as
void.

The
problem
with
the
“we
have
to
defer
to
the
courts”
excuse
from
the
Virginia
Bar
is
that
the
ethics
complaint
raises

more
issues

beyond
the
status
of
the
indictments.
Issues
that
explicitly
fall

outside

the
authority
of
the
court
to
determine.
By
shrugging
off
the
whole
complaint
over
the
limited
issue
of
the
indictments,
the
Virginia
Bar
created
a
troubling
zone
of
unaccountability.

As
the
administration
pressure
tests
every
guardrail
against
corruption
and
abuse,
it
relishes
these
pockets
of
deferment,
where
no
authority
claims
responsibility.
The
courts
can’t
discipline
a
lawyer
for
generally
lawless
conduct,
and
the
state
bar
now
claims
it
can’t
discipline
a
lawyer
without
a
notarized
and
engraved
permission
slip
from
a
judge
that
reads
“Please
Discipline
This
Lawyer.”
Professional
disciplinary
authorities
are
supposed
to
have
a
broader
portfolio
than
the
courts
because
unethical
lawyers
can
stay
on
the
right
side
of
the
courts
while
still
presenting
a
risk
to
the
public.
A
state
bar
is

designed

to
nip
this

Better
Call
Lindsey

pilot
in
the
bud.

The
Campaign
for
Accountability
complaint
included
a
competent
representation
violation,
citing
Halligan’s
criminal
law
experience

which
amounts
to
“watched
episode
of

Law
&
Order

(fell
asleep)”

and
the
very
public

firings

and

sidelinings

of
veteran
criminal
prosecutors
in
the
office
recommending
against
charges.
This
allegation
is
about
reckless
practice
and
wouldn’t
really
end
up
in
front
of
a
judge.

And
yet
it’s
somehow
fitting
that
this
state
cares
more
about

bar
applicants
wearing
suits
and
dresses
to
take
the
bar
exam

than
the
possibility
that
someone
lacks
the
competence
to
run
a
prosecutorial
office.
It’s
the
sort
of

style
over
substance

response
that
captures
the
zeitgeist
of
the
Trump
era.

It
included

Halligan’s
disastrously
hilarious
Signal
exchange
with
Anna
Bower
of
Lawfare
,
where
she
shared
what
she
seemed
to
understand
to
be
an
extrajudicial
disclosure
of
non-public,
sensitive
information
about
ongoing
matters.
When
she
belatedly
tried
to
pull
the
conversation
off
the
record,
she
noted
that
these
were
disappearing
Signal
messages.
Disappearing
message
apps
are
less
a
prosecutor
tool
and
more
of
a
drug
dealer
thing.
Except
drug
dealers
understand
the
rules
of
evidence
better
than
this.

As
the
complaint
states:

Ms.
Halligan’s
actions
in
contacting
a
journalist
through
Signal,
setting
her
messages
to
disappear
in
8
hours
and
retroactively
claiming
the
exchange
was
off
the
record
in
an
effort
to
secretly
influence
media
coverage
of
the
James
case
appears
a
deliberate
violation
of
the
FRAand,
therefore,
a
violation
of
RCP
8.4(b).

None
of
this
turns
on
the
court’s
adjudication
of
the
matter.
It’s
an
allegation
that
the
attorney’s
conduct

even
if
the
cases
weren’t
born
losers

breaches
ethical
rules.
If
a
government
prosecutor
has
deliberately
set
up
a
spoliation
device
to
obscure
conversations
with
journalists
she’s
having
in
an
effort
to
improperly
influence
the
public
narrative…

that’s
a
job
for
a
state
licensing
authority
to
investigate
.

Maybe
the
Virginia
Bar
will
change
its
tune
now
that
the
court
has
taken
action.
Probably
not,
though.
Everyone
knew
that
the
court
would
issue
a
ruling
swiftly
in
this
matter.
If
the
bar
authorities
were
serious
about
waiting
to
see
what
the
court
did
before
initiating
any
investigation,
they
could’ve
kept
quiet
another
week
instead
of
offering
the
legal
equivalent
of
a
“thoughts
and
prayers”
tweet.
At
this
point,
they’ll
likely
hem
and
haw
about
appeals
to
kick
the
can
into
oblivion.

This
letter
is
a
declaration
of
abdication.
And
it
couldn’t
come
at
a
worse
time
for
the
profession.


(Virginia
State
Bar
Letter
available
on
next
page…)


Earlier
:

Lindsey
Halligan
Officially
More
Stupid
Than
You
Imagined


Lindsey
Halligan
Manages
To
Lose
Two
Cases
At
Once,
Which
Is
Honestly
Impressive


Is
The
Comey
Case
Barred
By
The
Statute
Of
Limitations?
It’s
Complicated!
(But
Also
Yes.)




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
.