Epstein Fallout Rocks Legal As Admin Tries To Deflect From ICE – Above the Law

As
predicted
on
last
week’s
episode,

Brad
Karp
left
the
top
post
at
Paul
Weiss

following
the
disclosure
of
friendly
correspondence
with
Jeffrey
Epstein.
But
Karp
wasn’t
the
only
Biglaw
lawyer
in
the
files,
nor
were
his
conversations
the
most
troubling.
A
former
Clifford
Chance
trainee

drafted
a
sex
contract
with
Epstein
,
Goldman
Sachs
GC
Kathy
Ruemmler

made
a
joke
with
Epstein

that

normally

you
wouldn’t
make
with
someone
who
already
pleaded
guilty
to
child
prostitution
charges,
and
Alan
Dershowitz
managed
to
drag
Paul
Weiss
into
the
case
again
when
people
found
sex
tourism
legal
analysis
in
the
files
from

a
now-Paul
Weiss
partner…
passing
along
Dershowitz’s
thoughts
.

Meanwhile
in
Minnesota,
a
DOJ
lawyer
called
out
the
broken
immigration
system
before

literally
asking
to
be
held
in
contempt

so
she
could
get
some
sleep.
which
is
what
happens
when
an
administration
breaks
the
legal
system
so
thoroughly
that
even
its
own
lawyers
can’t
keep
up
with
the
chaos.
And
legal
tech
took
a
financial
jolt

as
Anthropic
announced
its
entry
into
the
legal
tech
space
.

Sheriff Accused Of Killing Judge In Chambers Wants Death Penalty Off The Table – Above the Law

Mickey
Stines

Last
year,
Kentucky
District
Judge
Kevin
D.
Mullins
was
shot
dead
in
his
chambers.
Shortly
after
the
shots
were
fired,
then-Sheriff
Mickey
Stines
walked
out
of
chambers,
surrendered
to
the
police
and
explained
that
“They’re
trying
to
kidnap
my
wife
and
kid.”
He’s
understandably
been
the
top
suspect
for
the
murder
ever
since.
The
local
Kentucky
killing
made
national
waves
for
a
few
reasons.
One,
you
rarely
hear
of
sheriffs
shooting
judges.
Second,
the
judge
was
accused
of
running
a
sex
ring
out
of
his
courthouse
where
women
were
coerced
in
to
having
sex
to
get
reduced
sentences.

Stines
pleaded
not
guilty
to
the
murder
of
a
public
official.
Before
the
trial
starts,
he
and
his
legal
team
are
trying
to
get
the
death
penalty
off
the
table.

WCYB

has
coverage:

A
motion
has
been
filed
by
the
defense
for
former
Letcher
County
Sheriff
Shawn
“Mickey”
Stines
in
hopes
of
avoiding
the
death
penalty…In
the
court
filing,
the
defense
wants
a
hearing
to
determine
if
Stines
has
a
serious
intellectual
disability
or
serious
mental
illness.

You’ve
gotta
respect
due
process
and
there’s
no
shame
in
attorneys
going
for
any
colorable
argument
that
could
help
their
client,
but
shouldn’t
any
serious
intellectual
disabilities
or
mental
illnesses
have
been
sussed
out
during
his
time
as
a
sheriff?
Especially
if
said
conditions
made
him
prone
to,
I
don’t
know,
allegedly
shooting
people
dead
in
broad
daylight?
Maybe
they
just
do
things
differently
in
Kentucky.


Former
Kentucky
Sheriff
Accused
Of
Killing
Judge
Wants
Hearing
To
Avoid
Death
Penalty

[WCYB]


Earlier
:

Slain
Judge
Accused
Of
‘Running
A
Brothel
Out
Of
That
Courtroom’



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.

World’s Richest Law Firm Takes The Stage In Music City – Above the Law

Kirkland
&
Ellis
just
dropped
a
new
track
in
Music
City

and
yes,
it’s
a
full-on
Biglaw
power
ballad.

The
world’s
richest
law
firm
is
officially
opening
a
Nashville
office,
calling
the
city
“an
ideal
environment”
for
more
“aggressive”
growth,
referring
to
the
office
launch
as
“part
of
its
strategy
to
attract
top
legal
talent
and
meet
growing
client
demand”

which
in
Kirkland-speak
translates
to:
we’re
not
here
for
karaoke
night,
we’re
here
for
a
multi-album
deal.

The
firm
is
launching
its
Nashville
presence
with
a
lineup
of
litigation
partners
that
reads
like
a
touring
supergroup:
Tara
Blake,
Matt
Smith,
Paul
Rosenblatt,
and
Travis
Swearingen,
relocating
in
from
Houston,
the
Bay
Area,
and
D.C.
And
that’s
just
the
opening
act.
Kirkland
says
around
10
litigators
have
joined
or
will
join
the
office
soon,
with
more
partners
and
associates
coming
across
both
litigation
and
transactional
practices.
Nashville
may
be
a
secondary
market,
but
this
isn’t
just
a
satellite
office
for
the
firm

it’s
a
full-stage
production
with
backup
singers,
lighting,
and
a
pyrotechnics
budget.

Chairman
Jon
Ballis
praised
Nashville
as
a
“vibrant
and
growing
city”
with
a
strong
talent
pool
and
law
school
community

which
is
corporate
code
for
the
city
having
money,
lawyers,
and
momentum,
and
Kirkland
wants
to
remix
all
three.
The
firm
is
pitching
the
move
as
part
of
its
broader
national
growth
strategy,
and
if
recent
history
is
any
guide,
that
strategy
sounds
a
lot
like:
open
new
offices,
hire
aggressively,
dominate
markets,
repeat.
“We’re
excited
to
open
our
doors
in
the
Music
City
with
a
terrific
group
of
lawyers
across
our
litigation
and
transactional
practice
areas,”
Ballis
said
in
a
statement.

This
Nashville
office
isn’t
a
side
project
for
the
firm,
it’s
another
verse
in
a
very
loud
growth
anthem.
As
noted
by
the

American
Lawyer
,
Kirkland
has
been
on
a
nationwide
expansion
tour:
Salt
Lake
City,
Miami,
Philadelphia,
and
now
Nashville.
Secondary
markets
like
Austin,
Atlanta,
Denver,
Miami,
and
Nashville
are
becoming
Biglaw’s
hottest
venues,
driven
by
client
migration,
remote
work,
and
business-friendly
climates.
Firms
aren’t
just
following
the
money

they’re
following
the
vibes.

So
yes,
Kirkland
is
officially
trying
to
make
beautiful
music
in
Music
City.
And
judging
by
the
size
of
the
band
they’re
assembling,
this
isn’t
a
quiet
acoustic
set

it’s
a
stadium
tour. 


Kirkland
Opens
in
Nashville,
Calling
It
‘an
Ideal
Environment’
for
More
Growth

[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.

ICE Has Kidnapped The Staff At My Favorite Burrito Shop – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Alex
Kormann/The
Minnesota
Star
Tribune
via
Getty
Images)

I
know
a
little
place
where
the
ingredients
are
always
fresh.
You
can
get
a
mega-burrito
and
a
Dos
Equis
to
wash
it
down
for
not
much
more
than
10
bucks.

If
you’re
in
a
bad
mood
when
you
arrive,
you
won’t
be
for
long,
because
the
workers
smile,
they
laugh,
they
seem
like
they’re
having
so
much
fun
making
your
food
just
the
way
you
like
it
that
you
can’t
help
but
start
to
feel
like
you’re
having
a
little
fun
yourself.
When
I’m
in
there
with
my
parents,
the
staff
are
careful
to
treat
them
(and
any
other
older
people)
with
respect.
Someone
always
comes
around
from
behind
the
counter
to
carry
my
mom’s
food
to
her
table
for
her.

Last
week
my
favorite
burrito
shop
was
dark.
The
door
was
locked.
A
note
posted
outside
indicated
that
they
would
be
closed
for
the
foreseeable
future
for
kitchen
renovations.

No
mention
had
been
made
of
upcoming
renovations
at
any
of
my
prior
visits
though.
With
ICE
known
to
be
skulking
about,
it
didn’t
exactly
take
Sherlock
Holmes
to
figure
out
what
had
really
happened.

Immigration
agents
reportedly
kidnapped
several
of
the
employees
and
are
in
the
process
of
deporting
them.
I
confirmed
this
as
best
I
could,
which
basically
meant
asking
people
in
the
area
what
they
had
heard,
because
the
Department
of
Homeland
Security
generally
won’t
tell
taxpayers
(their
bosses)
who
they
are
taking
or
what
they
are
doing
with
them.

I
say
“kidnapped”
because
this
most
definitely
was
not
an
“arrest”
and
there
is
no
better
word
for
what
actually
took
place.
When
a
police
officer
takes
another
person
into
custody,
he
or
she
is
acting
under
the
color
of
legal
authority.
This
police
officer
must
respect
the
constitutional
rights
of
the
accused,
and
must
have
probable
cause
indicating
that
the
person
being
arrested
has
committed
a
crime.
When
police
officers
make
arrests,
their
badges
and
the
badge
numbers
on
them
are
visible,
their
last
names
are
stitched
into
their
uniforms,
and
their
faces
are
uncovered,
so
that
if
your
rights
are
indeed
violated
while
you
are
in
custody,
you
know
who
to
complain
about
later
on.
When
a
police
officer
goes
beyond
the
legal
authority
with
which
he
or
she
is
entrusted,
that
police
officer
is
subject
to
disciplinary
action,
civil
liability,
or
even
criminal
prosecution.

The
color
of
someone’s
skin
or
the
fact
that
they
speak
English
with
an
accent
does
not
amount
to
probable
cause.
Simply

being
an
undocumented
immigrant
is
not

even,
on
its
own,
a
crime.

The
president

who
has
himself
been
convicted
of
far
more
serious
crimes
than

almost
all
of
the
people

his
administration
is
deporting

calling
some
thug
a
police
officer
does
not
make
him
one.
Masked,
unaccountable,
unidentifiable
ICE
agents
who
trample
the
constitutional
rights
of
every
person
they
encounter
are
not
law
enforcement.
One
cannot
enforce
the
law
by
breaking
the
law,
and
the
Constitution
is

the
supreme
law

of
the
land.
These
are
kidnappings,
plain
and
simple.

I
give
far
less
of
a
damn
about
who
was
born
on
what
side
of
some
imaginary
line
drawn
on
a
map
by
a
bunch
of
dead
guys
than
I
do
about
whether
a
person
is
fundamentally
good
or
evil.
Even
if
you
do
fixate
on
ancient
cartography,
you
should
not
support
the
cruelty
and
the
lawlessness
inflicted
on
the
millions
of
hardworking,
innocent
people
who
came
to
this
country
for
decades
under
a
system
that
welcomed
them
in
with
a
wink.
We
needed
their

labor
and
their
other
contributions

to
the
economy,
but
to
change
the
law
to
bring
them
in
more
officially
would
have
required
our
useless
lawmakers
to
get
off
their
asses
for
once
and
would
have
prevented
American
bosses
from
exploiting
immigrant
employees
so
easily.

The
individuals
who
worked
at
my
favorite
burrito
shop
are
good
people.
They
didn’t
deserve
this.
The
local
economy
didn’t
deserve
this.
I
didn’t
deserve
to
lose
food
I
liked
and
a
place
I
felt
welcome.
If
you
support
what
ICE
is
doing,
I
don’t
care
what
you
say
your
reasons
for
that
are,
because
I
know
the
real
reason:
you
are
a
bad
person
who
enjoys
other
people’s
suffering.
I
see
the
real
you,
and
so
does
everyone
else.




Jonathan
Wolf
is
a
civil
litigator
and
author
of 
Your
Debt-Free
JD
 (affiliate
link).
He
has
taught
legal
writing,
written
for
a
wide
variety
of
publications,
and
made
it
both
his
business
and
his
pleasure
to
be
financially
and
scientifically
literate.
Any
views
he
expresses
are
probably
pure
gold,
but
are
nonetheless
solely
his
own
and
should
not
be
attributed
to
any
organization
with
which
he
is
affiliated.
He
wouldn’t
want
to
share
the
credit
anyway.
He
can
be
reached
at 
[email protected].

Baker McKenzie Blamed AI For Massive Layoff, But The Problem Is Much More Complicated – Above the Law

When
Baker
McKenzie
announced
plans
to

cut
roughly
700
business
services
staff
,
the
firm
pegged
some
of
the
blame
squarely
on
AI,
feeding
into
the
technology-fueled
paranoia
surrounding
artificial
intelligence.
It
certainly
doesn’t
help
that
the
AI
hype
cycle
turns
on
tech
gurus
juicing
up
their
VC
sugar
daddies
with
promises
that
AI
will
replace
human
workers
any
moment
now,
even
though
AI
agents
can’t
reliably
do
much
more
than

accidentally
delete
a
whole
computer
and
then
apologize
for
it
.
I
don’t
know
if
Baker
McKenzie
really
believes
it
can
replace
700
staff
with
AI
or
if
blaming
the
bots
just
provides
a
convenient
excuse
for
general
management
missteps,
but
either
way
it’s
not
a
great
sign
for
the
remaining
team.

And,
of
course,
the
headlines
naturally
raise
attorney
anxiety
as
lawyers
wonder
if
they’re
about
to
be
replaced.

The
short
answer
is
that
AI
isn’t
replacing
Biglaw
lawyers.
The
long
answer
is
that
it
might
depend
on
which
Biglaw
firm
we’re
talking
about.

While
the
developers
hustling
for
VC
cash
to
heap
upon
the
AI
furnace
will
tell
you
that
“agentic”
AI
is
new
and
revolutionary,
the
reality
is
that
agents
are
still
stumbling
with
multi-stage
tasks
and
the
more
people
try
to
aim
them
at
higher-level
thinking,
the
more
time
the
“human
in
the
loop”
spends
fixing
the
mistakes
generated
along
the
way.
That’s
not
to
say
AI
isn’t
radically
changing
business
workflows

including
legal

but
it’s
not
building
robot
lawyers.
Hell,
it’s
hemorrhaging
money
to
make
the
technology
hallucinate
1
percent
less.

As
bots
go,
AI
is
charting
a
sci-fi
future
path
closer
to

Star
Wars
.
He’s
cute
and
personable
and
can
perform
a
lot
of
useful
technical
tasks,
but
R2D2
is
more
or
less
defeated
by
a
flight
of
stairs.
These
AI
tools
will
accelerate
your
summaries
and
timelines,
but
pump
the
brakes
before
handing
it
a
case
file
and
turning
it
loose.

In
this
way,
AI
doesn’t
replace
lawyers,
it
improves
attorney
efficiency
significantly
enough
that
the
firm
doesn’t
need
as
many
lawyers
to
produce
the
same
results.
That
won’t
feel
any
different
than
“replacement”
for
the
lawyers
on
the
wrong
end
of
that
equation,
but
it’s
still
a
useful
distinction.
Law
firms
shaving
a
few
percent
off
their
associate
hiring
is
not
the
same
as
the
cataclysmic
human
layoffs
that
tech
futurists
warn
about.
Or,
more
accurately,
that
they
entice
their
deeply
anti-humanist
investors
with.
Either
way,
AI
will
impact
hiring
at
the
margins.

Mostly.

Now
come
the
caveats.
Adopting
AI
isn’t
going
to
replace
scores
of
lawyers
and
spark
Biglaw
layoffs,

but
in-house
and
small
firm
adoption
might
.
Clients
continue
to
deal
with
mounting
budgetary
pressure.
If
AI
allows
a
deputy
GC
to
handle
the
matter
entirely
in-house

as
opposed
to
forking
over
Biglaw
rates
,
that’s
a
gold
star
from
the
board.
Even
if
the
job
can’t
be
entirely
ported
in-house,
if
smaller
firms

at
a
lower
price
point
than
Biglaw

can
use
AI
to
give
their
handful
of
lawyers
the
brute
force
power
of
a
large
law
firm,
they’ll
drink
some
of
that
Biglaw
milkshake.

And

that

is
where
Biglaw
lawyers
stand
to
get
laid
off.
Not
from
the
internal
automation,
but
from
the
fleeing
revenue.

But
this
fate
won’t
strike
all
firms
equally.
There
are
essentially
two
kinds
of
firms
sitting
at
the
top
of
the
Am
Law
100.
On
one
side,
you’ve
got
decently
large
firms
doing
incredibly
lucrative,
high-margin
work.
These
are
your
Wachtells,
your
Cravaths,
your
Davis
Polks.
These
firms
boast
hundreds
of
attorneys
generating
massive
revenue
per
lawyer.
Wachtell’s
RPL
clocked
in
at
$4.47
million
on
the
most
recent
Am
Law
100.
It’s
a
business
model
built
on
capturing
valuable
work
from
clients
ready
to
spend
big
for
it.

On
the
other
side,
you’ve
got
the
megafirms.
This
is
where
you’d
find
a
firm
like
Baker
McKenzie.
The
firm’s
sitting
at
No.
9
on
the
Global
200
with
an
impressive
$3.4
billion
in
revenue.
But
it’s
spread
across
roughly
4,500
lawyers,
yielding
an
RPL
somewhere
around
$721,000.
DLA
Piper,
Dentons,
the
various
Verein
Voltrons.
These
are
firms
raking
in
revenue
by
stationing
an
office
on
every
continent
and
leaning
on
offering
clients
expertise
all
over
the
place.
And
generating
revenue
from
volume.

One
model
has
a
lot
more
exposure
to
AI.

The
high-RPL
firms
have
clients
who
already
decided
they’d
rather
pay
big
bucks
than
shop
for
a
deal.
It’s
not
work
a
client
is
eager
to
take
on
themselves.
If
AI
speeds
up
the
process,
the
firm
is
still
going
to
collect
its
fees.
These
are
the
firms
that
will
trim
their
future
offers
but
aren’t
about
to
purge
lawyers.

On
the
other
hand,
when
a
business
model
is
based
around
size
and
volume,
efficiency
takes
a
toll.
When
you’ve
built
a
$3.4
billion
business
on
the
premise
that
clients
need
4,500
lawyers
scattered
across
70
offices
to
handle
cross-border
compliance,
due
diligence,
and
regulatory
work
at
volume,
the
math
gets
ugly
fast
when
technology
lets
a
team
of
50
handle
what
used
to
require
150.
If
AI
makes
lawyers
more
efficient,
that
$721K
RPL
isn’t
going
to
cut
it
for
a
lot
of
those
lawyers.

Which
should
give
some
pause
to
all
the
firms
scrambling
to
merge
their
way
up
the
revenue
charts.
But
these
headcount-and-geography
mergers
rest
on
the
same
volume-dependent
operation
that
AI
threatens
to
hollow
out.
Not
every
merger
is
doomed,
of
course.
Combinations
can
bring
together
complementary
high-value
practices.
But
when
a
pair
of
second-50
firms
joins
to
create
a
behemoth
that
suddenly
moves
them
into
the
top-25…
that’s
begging
for
a
“harder
they
fall”
narrative.

The
Baker
McKenzie
layoffs
this
week
didn’t
involve
lawyers,
but
we
received
tips
over
the
last
few
days
suggesting
a
number
of
junior
associates
were
let
go
for
non-performance
reasons.
When
a
firm
says
it’s
“rethinking
the
ways
in
which
we
work,
including
through
our
use
of
AI,”
that
doesn’t
sound
like
they’re
sure
they’re
finished
making
changes.

But
even
as
the
megafirms
consider
their
exposure
to
AI
advancements,
it’s
worth
considering
the
Salesforce
experience.
No
company
invested
more
in
the
agentic
AI
hype
than
Salesforce
and
they
laid
off
swaths
of
employees
accordingly.
By
the
end
of
2025,
their
own
studies
determined

their
agents
mostly
failed

and
reports
surfaced
that
senior
executives
at
Salesforce
determined
that
they
had
“massively
overestimated
AI’s
capabilities.”

The
risk
isn’t
that
AI
is
competent
enough
to
replace
lawyers,
but
that
there’s
a
lot
of
hype
out
there
fooling
people
into
believing
that
it
is.
When
that
sci-fi
mythologizing
collides
with
the
genuine
risks
AI
presents
to
a
volume-based
business
model,
firms
are
going
to
make
some
overestimations
that
unnecessarily
cost
a
lot
of
people
their
jobs.




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
.

New UN forum seeks busting space traffic cooperation barriers – Breaking Defense

WASHINGTON

With
skyrocketing

space
traffic

increasing
the
risks
of
accidental
collisions
and
misunderstandings
that
could
lead
to
military
conflicts,
a
new
UN
group
is
meeting
in
Vienna,
Austria
to
try
and
hash
out
practical
information
sharing
measures
among
nations.

The

Expert
Group
on
Space
Situational
Awareness
(EG
SSA)

was
initiated
under
the
Science
and
Technical
subcommittee
of
the
Committee
on
the

Peaceful
Uses
of
Outer
Space
(COPUOS)

last
July
by
the
United
Arab
Emirates,
which
is
serving
as
the
chair.
While
the
group
has
held
two
virtual
“intercessionals”
to
kick
start
the
discussions,
the
subcommittee’s
annual
session
Feb.
2-13
represents
the
first
time
group
members
have
met
in
person.

In
a
written
statement
Feb.
6,
Ryan
Guglietta,
the
US
State
Department
representative
to
the
meeting,
welcomed
the
EG
SSA,
calling
it
“an
unprecedented
opportunity
for
Member
States
to
convene
their
government
and
private
sector
technical
experts
to
have
substantive
discussions
on
how
to
improve
spaceflight
safety.

“We
are
optimistic
that
the
group
can
deliver
practical,
tangible
outcomes
that
help
all
actors
in
space
communicate
better
and
avoid
collisions,”
he
added.

The
US
delegation
to
the
talks
is
being
led
by
NASA
and
the
State
Department’s
Permanent
Mission
to
International
Organizations
in
Vienna,
a
State
Department
official
told
Breaking
Defense
in
an
email.

“The
United
States
supported
the
UAE’s
efforts
to
create
the

SSA

Expert
Group
in
2025
with
a
goal
of
improving
how
foreign
countries
share
SSA-related
data
and
enhance
the
safety
of
U.S.
government
and
commercial
space
objects,
particularly
as
a
wide
number
of
countries
become
active
in
space,”
the
spokesperson
said.

And
while
the
spokesperson
didn’t
elaborate
which
specific
countries
the
US
hopes
to
engage,
other
government
officials
said
that
China
is
at
the
top
of
the
list.

The
Pentagon
for
years
has
notified
Beijing
about
China’s
potential
on-orbit
conjunctions
using
data
from
US
Space
Command’s
(SPACECOM)

Space
Surveillance
Network

of
radars
and
ground-
and
space-based
sensors.
Those
notifications

which
include
information
similar
to
that
provided
to
US
commercial
operators

are
provided
via
email
to
the
Beijing
Institute
of
Telecommunications
and
Tracking
Technology
(BITTT),
a
research
unit
of
the
PLA’s
Aerospace
Forces.

BITTT
is
the
official
Chinese
government
point
of
contact
for
its
domestic
operators
with
regard
to
issues
of
space
safety,
including
collision
avoidance.

In
the
past,
SPACECOM
rarely,
if
ever,
got
any
kind
of
response
from
BITTT,
a
SPACECOM
spokesperson
previously
told
Breaking
Defense.

For
example,
back
in

February
2022
,
in
response
to
questions
from
Breaking
Defense
about
Chinese
allegations
that
two
SpaceX
Starlink
satellites
the
previous
December
had
nearly
rammed
China’s
Tiangong
space
station,
a
SPACECOM
spokesperson
bemoaned
the
fact
that
there
was
no
direct
communication
from
Beijing
about
the
potential
collisions.

“The
U.S.
Government
has
repeatedly
sought
to
improve
bilateral
sharing
of
spaceflight
information
with
the
PRC
for
nearly
a
decade.
The
USG
has
also
consistently
urged
the
PRC
to
utilize
its
designated
points
of
contact
for
concerns
relating
to
human
spaceflight
safety
and
emergency
collision
avoidance
support,”
the
spokesperson
said
at
the
time.

However,
according
to
the
US
government
and
industry
officials,
over
the
past
year
Beijing
has
begun
reaching
out
about
potential
on-orbit
crashes.
In
the
most
public
example,

in
October

the
China
National
Space
Agency
for
the
first
time
initiated
contact
with
NASA
about
a
possible
crash
between
satellites
owned
by
the
two
space
agencies
and
offered
to
move
its
satellite.

The
communications
pathway
has
been
smoothed
in
part
by
a
US
government
effort
last
year
to
craft
cross-agency
guidelines
for
communicating
about
SSA
issues,
slating
BITTT
as
the
main
channel.
As
one
official
said,
that
helped
“get
our
act
together”
so
that
the
Chinese
were
not
confused
by
contacts
from
multiple
US
sources.

Further,
the
interagency
group
in
August
2025
issued
to
US
commercial
operators
a
similar
set
of
best
practices
for
mitigating
potential
on-orbit
collisions
with
China.
The
guidance,
obtained
by
Breaking
Defense,
explains
when
and
how
operators
should
contact
BITTT
following
a
SPACECOM
notification
about
possible
crash
with
a
Chinese
satellite,
as
well
as
when
an
operator
simply
wants
to
discuss
safety
precautions
and/or
maneuvers
about
its
birds
in
the
vicinity
of
Chinese
spacecraft.

The
thaw
in
bilateral
SSA
relations
could
help
foster
the
UN
negotiations,
which
according
to
the
working
group’s
agenda
include
discussions
of
“enhanced
global
operational
coordination
on
SSA
data
systems
and
harmonization
of
data
formats
across
global
SSA
systems”
and
the
creation
of
forums
for
regular
information
exchanges.

“In
past
dialogue
and
research
work
around
US/China
space
safety
coordination,
I
have
found
that
Chinese
stakeholders
perceive
a
stronger
need
for
government
policy
structure
to
enable
them
to
engage
directly
on
space
safety,”
said
Ian
Christensen,
senior
director
of
private
sector
programs
at
the
Secure
World
Foundation.

“While
the
Expert
Group
is
a
truly
multilateral
process,
and
not
in
my
view
primarily
about
the
US-China
relationship,
I’m
hopeful
it
will
contribute
to
the
political
conditions
necessary
to
see
further
improvements
in
space
safety
information
sharing
between
those
two
countries,”
he
added.

The
group
is
expected
to
hold
a
series
of
meetings,
both
virtual
and
in
person,
between
now
and
the
COPUOS
plenary
meeting
in
2028
when
its
results
are
due.
The
committee’s
annual
plenaries
are
usually
held
in
May
or
June.

Morning Docket: 02.11.26 – Above the Law

*
Trump
administration
tried
to
indict
lawmakers
who
accurately
described
the
military’s
obligation
to
not
follow
illegal
orders.
Jeanine
Pirro
couldn’t
get
a
grand
jury
would
indict.
[NY
Post
]

*
Accreditation
function
looks
to
become
even
more
autonomous
from
rest
of
ABA.
[Law.com]

*
FBI
raid
on
Georgia
elections
facility
included
government
sharing
classified
intelligence
data
with
crackpot
lawyer
rehashing
debunked
claims.
[Politico]

*
Judge
Rakoff
rules
that
materials
that
the
defendant
shared
with
attorneys
were
not
privileged
and
confidential
because
they
were
created
with
assistance
from
a
third-party
AI
service.
[Law360]

*
The
Eastern
District
of
Virginia
takes
another
hit
as
white-collar
chief
bolts
to
start
own
firm.
[Bloomberg
Law
News
]

*
Law
professors
argue
that
states
should
be
able
to
write
their
own
labor
laws.
[The
Hill
]

Bid launched to extend Zimbabwe president’s term in office

Getty
Images
Emmerson
Mnangagwa,
once
Robert
Mugabe’s
deputy,
is
due
to
step
down
in
2028

Zimbabwe’s
cabinet
has
approved
draft
legislation
that
would
allow
President
Emmerson
Mnangagwa,
83,
to
extend
his
stay
in
office
until
at
least
2030.

Presidents
would
be
chosen
by
MPs
rather
than
in
a
direct
vote
and
could
serve
a
maximum
of
two
seven-year
terms,
rather
than
the
current
five-year
terms,
under
the
proposals.

Justice
Minister
Ziyambi
Ziyambi
said
public
consultations
would
be
held
before
the
bill
heads
to
parliament
for
debate,
where
both
chambers
are
dominated
by
the
ruling
Zanu-PF
party.

Legal
challenges
are
likely
as
constitutional
experts
argue
a
referendum
is
needed
if
term
limits
are
changed

and
also
point
out
that
such
amendments
cannot
benefit
a
sitting
president.

Mnangagwa,
who
first
came
to
power
in
2017
after
a
military
coup
ousted
long-time
leader
Robert
Mugabe,
won
a
presidential
election
the
next
year
and
a
second
term
in
2023

though
the
results
were
disputed.

Known
as
“the
crocodile”
because
of
his
political
cunning,
his
final
five-year
term
is
due
to
expire
in
2028.

In
a
referendum
held
13
years
ago,
Zimbabweans
overwhelmingly
voted
for
a
new
constitution
that
introduced
presidential
term
limits
when
Mugabe’s
grip
on
power
seemed
entrenched

he
had
ruled
the
country
since
independence
in
1980.

Hints
that
Mnangagwa,
who
was
once
Mugabe’s
deputy
until
they
fell
out
over
the
growing
political
ambitions
of
the
then-first
lady,
wanted
to
stay
in
power
beyond
2028
started
two
years
ago.

The
slogan
“2030
he
will
still
be
the
leader”
began
to
be
chanted
at
Zanu-PF
rallies
with
his
supporters
saying
he
needed
to
remain
in
office
to
complete
his
“Agenda
2030”
development
programme

though
President
Mnangagwa
publicly
rejected
the
idea.

He
has
faced
some
fierce
detractors
within
Zanu-PF,
but
his
main
critic

Blessed
Geza,
also
known
as
“Bombshell”

died
last
week.

This
time
last
year
Geza,
a
respected
veteran
of
the
1970s
war
of
independence
and
then
member
of
Zanu-PF’s
powerful
central
committee,
had
launched
a
scathing
attack
on
Mnangagwa’s
ambition
to
stay
in
power.

He
apologised
for
helping
him
come
into
office
and
accused
the
president
of
nepotism
in
his
bid
to
stay
in
office
beyond
2028.

Zanu-PF
expelled
Geza
from
the
party
for
disloyalty
and
he
was
forced
into
hiding.

Yet
he
continued
to
attract
a
large
following
on
social
media,
where
he
regularly
posted
videos
calling
for
protests.

Hours
before
his
death
a
message
posted
on
his
social
media
pages
urged
Zimbabweans
to
carry
forward
the
“noble
war”
to
remove
President
Mnangagwa
and
“end
the
plunder
of
our
country”.

He
was
in
South
Africa
when
his
family
announced
his
death
on
Friday.

“At
a
time
when
silence
would
have
been
easier,
he
chose
to
speak
out
against
corruption
and
nepotism
that
continue
to
undermine
the
promise
of
independence,”
Andrease
Ethan
Mathibela,
national
chairman
of
the
influential
Zimbabwe
National
Liberation
War
Veterans
Association,
said.

The
government
is
now
forging
forward
with
its
2030
plans
for
Mnangagwa
and
says
the
intention
behind
the
draft
law
is
to
strengthen
governance
and
bring
political
stability.

Post
published
in:

Featured

Education ministry seeks control of BEAM to end payment delays

This
proposal
comes
amid
persistent
delays
in
BEAM
payments
to
schools
and
the
Zimbabwe
Schools
Examination
Council
(ZIMSEC),
which
have
disrupted
learning
and
examinations
for
thousands
of
vulnerable
pupils
across
the
country.

Currently,
the
Treasury
releases
BEAM
funds
to
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service,
Labour
and
Social
Welfare
as
part
of
its
social
services
budget,
which
then
transfers
funds
to
the
Ministry
of
Primary
and
Secondary
Education,
that
disburses
them
to
schools.

However,
this
multi-step
process
has
resulted
in
chronic
delays,
leaving
schools
without
fees
for
BEAM-supported
learners
and
exposing
marginalised
children
to
exclusion
from
education.

Director
of
Communications
and
Advocacy
in
the
Ministry
of
Primary
and
Secondary
Education,
Taungana
Ndoro,
confirmed
that
discussions
are
underway
to
restructure
the
flow
of
BEAM
funding.

“The
issue
of
BEAM
is
that
the
budget
line
item
rests
in
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service,
Labour
and
Social
Welfare
as
a
social
services
fund
in
that
ministry,”
Ndoro
said.

“We
actually
have
to
wait
for
that
money
to
come
from
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service,
Labour
and
Social
Welfare
to
come
to
us
and
then
we
disburse
to
our
schools.
What
we
only
do
with
BEAM
funds
is
receive
the
money
and
send
it
to
the
schools.”

Ndoro
said
failure
to
receive
funds
means
the
ministry
is
unable
to
pay
schools.

“If
we
have
not
received
it,
we
can’t
send
it
to
the
school,”
he
said.

While
this
proposal
is
under
consideration,
Ndoro
said
the
government
has
set
up
a
tripartite
committee
comprising
the
Deputy
Ministers
of
Finance,
Public
Service
and
Education
to
address
the
bottlenecks.

“So
now
there’s
a
tripartite
team
committee
that
has
been
set
up,
who
are
now
discussing
to
say,
‘Treasury,
could
you
release
the
BEAM
funds?
The
BEAM
funds
go
to
the
Public
Service
Ministry
and
then
the
Public
Service
Ministry
sends
it
to
us,’”
Ndoro
said.

“There
are
negotiations
around
that
as
I
am
speaking.”

BEAM
was
established
to
support
underprivileged
children
to
access
education
by
paying
school
fees
and
examination
costs.

However,
the
programme
has
struggled
in
recent
years,
defaulting
on
payments
to
schools
and
ZIMSEC,
raising
fears
that
learners
from
poor
households
could
be
barred
from
classes
or
examinations.

At
the
end
of
2024,
the
government
owed
US$98
million
to
BEAM
and
US$50
million
to
ZIMSEC.

Parents
and
education
stakeholders
have
raised
alarm
over
the
impact
of
the
funding
gaps,
especially
for
learners
sitting
for
national
examinations.

Concerns
have
also
been
raised
over
reports
suggesting
BEAM
funds
may
have
been
diverted.

“In
February
2025,
there
were
news
reports
that
sometime
in
August
2024,
funds
for
BEAM
were
diverted
towards
the
building
of
infrastructure
during
the
country’s
SADC
chairmanship
era,”
one
parent
said,
noting
how
such
reports
were
disputed
by
state-controlled
media.

“Then
in
December
last
year,
we
saw
a
headline
saying
‘BEAM
Under
Scrutiny
as
Cabinet
Moves
to
Probe
Abuse
of
Education
Funds.’”

The
parent
questioned
whether
this
meant
BEAM
resources
had
been
redirected
away
from
learners.

“The
question
is,
does
that
therefore
mean
that
BEAM
funds
could
have
been
diverted
to
the
SADC
infrastructure,
and
what
does
that
mean
to
the
children?”
the
parent
said.

“If
BEAM
funds
are
under
scrutiny
or
said
to
have
been
abused,
what
is
the
ministry
saying?
Because
we
are
looking
at
beneficiaries
not
being
able
to
partake
in
education.”

Ndoro
said
the
education
ministry
does
not
control
BEAM
funds
until
they
are
transferred
from
Public
Service.

“We
wait
to
receive
that
money
from
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service.
This
is
why
there’s
always
this
glitch,”
he
said.

He
added
that
while
negotiations
continue,
the
ministry
expects
some
funding
to
be
released
this
year.

“We
should
be
able
to
receive
some
BEAM
funds
for
this
year,
whilst
the
issues
of
the
previous
outstanding
amount
are
being
handled,”
Ndoro
said.

However,
he
said
the
long-term
solution
lies
in
restructuring
the
programme.

“But
the
bigger
proposal
that
is
coming
up
in
terms
of
BEAM
is
why
does
the
Treasury
not
remove
that
line
item
from
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service
and
put
it
straight
into
the
Ministry
of
Education?”
he
said.

“So
if
that
happens,
we’re
able
to
then
disburse
this
quickly.”

Ndoro
suggested
competing
priorities
within
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service
may
be
contributing
to
the
delays.

“Remember,
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service
has
their
own
budget,
and
if
BEAM
funds
come
for
them,
they
may
be
saying
maybe
we
may
do
virement
later,
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
We
don’t
know,”
he
said.

Meanwhile,
the
ministry
says
it
is
reviewing
concerns
around
alleged
favouritism
and
political
interference
in
the
selection
of
BEAM
beneficiaries.

“There
are
concerns
that
some
children
qualify
due
to
favouritism,
political
affiliation,
as
freebies
of
being
close
to
political
persons,”
Ndoro
said.

“We
are
going
to
be
reviewing
that
very,
very
seriously.”

He
said
future
beneficiaries
would
be
prioritised
based
on
vulnerability.

“Those
that
are
going
to
benefit
from
BEAM
are
mainly
going
to
be
orphans
and
vulnerable
children,”
Ndoro
said.

“An
orphan
meaning
you
don’t
have
both
parents.
Those
are
the
ones
who
will
be
considered
first.
Then
those
who
have
one
parent.”

Ndoro
said
children
with
both
parents,
including
those
whose
parents
are
working
outside
the
country,
would
face
stricter
scrutiny.

“Those
children
with
both
parents,
even
if
they
are
in
South
Africa,
it’s
going
to
be
very
difficult,”
he
said.

“So
the
list
could
be
a
little
bit
leaner.
We
are
working
on
that
one.”

Parents Have Right To Choose Where To Buy School Uniforms, Ministry Says

Speaking
at
a
recent
meeting
in
Bulawayo,
the
ministry’s
Director
of
Communications
and
Advocacy,
Taungana
Ndoro,
urged
parents
with
grievances
to
report
them
to
the
Ministry’s
district
offices,
where
they
would
be
addressed
appropriately.

Citing
Thekwane
High
School
as
a
case
currently
under
investigation,
Ndoro
stressed
that
schools
are
not
allowed
to
make
uniform
purchases
a
condition
for
enrolment,
describing
such
practices
as
illegal.
He
said:

“There
was
talk
of
schools
saying
that
for
Form
One
or
Lower
Six,
purchase
uniforms
to
be
guaranteed
a
place.

“The
minister
announced
it
on
television:
no
school
is
allowed
to
force
parents
to
buy
uniforms
at
that
school.”

Ndoro
emphasised
that
parents
are
free
to
purchase
school
uniforms
from
any
supplier,
provided
the
correct
colour
codes
are
followed.

He
argued
that
when
a
school
engages
in
commercial
activities,
such
as
manufacturing
uniforms,
it
effectively
places
itself
in
competition
with
the
wider
market.

However,
he
stressed
that
competition
does
not
equate
to
a
monopoly,
and
schools
cannot
compel
parents
to
buy
uniforms
exclusively
from
them.

Ndoro
warned
that
any
school
that
forces
parents
to
purchase
uniforms
or
stationery
directly
from
the
institution
is
acting
unlawfully.
He
said:

“If
a
blazer
is
US$35
in
the
market
and
US$45
at
school,
parents
will
go
to
the
market.

“You
don’t
need
to
force
them,
and
if
it’s
vice
versa,
parents
will
buy
at
the
school.”

He
urged
communities
to
report
such
cases
through
official
channels,
“so
that
parents
do
not
have
to
suffer
in
silence.”

Ndoro
also
clarified
that
while
the
ministry’s
uniform
policy
mainly
applies
to
public
schools,
private
schools
are
governed
by
their
own
contractual
arrangements.
He
said:

“When
you
send
your
child
to
a
non-government
school,
you
have
made
your
choice
to
say
that
you
want
education
that
is
provided
outside
the
public
system.

“This
is
sort
of
like
a
private
arrangement
in
which
you
get
into
a
contractual
agreement
with
the
schools,
and
you
sign
various
contracts.

“If
you
don’t
read
the
fine
print
of
that
contract,
there’s
not
much
we
can
do
when
you
come
to
us
as
the
ministry.

“If
you
breach
that
contract,
they
will
take
you
to
court
outside
of
us
because
you’ve
made
the
contract
in
a
private
civil
arrangement.”

However,
Ndoro
stressed
that
private
schools
remain
subject
to
ministry
oversight
in
matters
such
as
fee
approvals
and
travel
authorisations.