BULAWAYO
–
At
least
two
people
were
killed
and
17
others
injured
on
Wednesday
night
after
a
commuter
omnibus
ploughed
into
a
crowd
of
evening
commuters
and
street
vendors
at
an
illegal
taxi
rank
in
Bulawayo,
police
said.
The
blue
Toyota
‘Baby
Quantum’
which
was
picking
up
passengers
at
an
undesignated
location
struck
pedestrians
at
the
intersection
of
6th
Avenue
and
Lobengula
Street
shortly
before
9PM.
Witnesses
said
the
driver
attempted
to
flee
on
foot
after
the
vehicle
came
to
a
halt
but
was
swiftly
apprehended
and
arrested.
Those
hit
by
the
out-of-control
vehicle
had
no
warning
as
it
came
hurtling
towards
them,
ramming
into
pushcarts,
vending
stalls
and
crashing
into
another
commuter
omnibus
as
people
screamed
and
scattered.
Two
people
died
on
the
spot,
police
confirmed.
A
large
crowd
later
gathered
as
officers
removed
the
bodies,
wrapped
in
red
blankets.
Seventeen
injured
victims
were
rushed
to
hospital,
some
with
serious
injuries.
Police
said
investigations
were
underway
to
establish
the
cause
of
the
crash
amid
fears
the
death
toll
could
rise.
The
tragedy
is
expected
to
reignite
calls
for
authorities
to
restore
order
in
Bulawayo’s
central
business
district,
particularly
around
the
illegal
6th
Avenue
taxi
rank
where
unregulated
commuter
pick-ups
and
street
vending
are
rampant.
The
official
Egodini
taxi
rank
is
located
just
a
short
distance
away,
but
some
commuter
omnibus
drivers
reportedly
prefer
operating
closer
to
the
CBD
in
an
effort
to
load
passengers
more
quickly.
(Photo
by
Alex
Kormann/The
Minnesota
Star
Tribune
via
Getty
Images)
Federal
Judge
Patrick
Schiltz
may
have
called
off
the
immediate
showdown
with
Immigration
and
Customs
Enforcement,
but
no
one
should
mistake
that
procedural
pause
for
a
truce.
As
previously
reported,
the
George
W.
Bush–appointed
judge
has
been
increasingly
exasperated
with
the
Trump
administration’s
approach
to
immigration
enforcement
in
Minnesota,
in
particular
ICE’s
apparent
allergy
to
complying
with
court
orders.
In
a
prior
order,
Schiltz
took
the
extraordinary
step
of
ordering
Todd
Lyons,
ICE’s
acting
director,
to
personally
appear
in
court
to
explain
why
the
agency
should
not
be
held
in
contempt.
Because
the
government
finally
released
the
detained
individual
at
the
center
of
the
case,
Schiltz
canceled
the
hearing
that
would
have
required
Lyons
to
appear.
ICE,
at
least
this
time,
blinked.
But
Schiltz
made
very
clear
that
compliance
under
threat
does
not
erase
a
pattern
of
misconduct.
Yesterday,
Schiltz
issued
an
order
—
a
biting
one
at
that
—
that
the
release
of
one
individual
after
the
threat
of
sanctions
“does
not
end
the
Court’s
concerns.”
And
went
on
to
list
some
96!
other
immigration
cases
where
the
government
is
ignoring
court
orders.
“ICE
is
not
a
law
unto
itself.
ICE
has
every
right
to
challenge
the
orders
of
this Court,
but,
like
any
litigant,
ICE
must
follow
those
orders
unless
and
until
they
are
overturned
or
vacated,”
Schiltz
wrote.
“This
list
should
give
pause
to
anyone
—
no
matter
his
or
her
political
beliefs
—
who
cares
about
the
rule
of
law,”
he
explained.
Then
came
the
bleakest
assessment
of
what
is
happening
in
the
Minnesota
federal
courts,
“ICE
has
likely
violated
more
court
orders
in
January
2026
than
some
federal
agencies
have
violated
in
their
entire
existence.”
Things
are
pretty
dire
in
Minnesota,
and
Judge
Schiltz
is
ringing
the
rule
of
law
warning
bell.
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].
Ed.
note:
This
is
the
latest
installment
in
a
series
of
posts
on
motherhood
in
the
legal
profession,
in
partnership
with
our
friends
at MothersEsquire.
Welcome
Jeanine
M.
Donohue
back
to
our
pages.
Click here if
you’d
like
to
donate
to
MothersEsquire.
We
are
often
taught
as
children
that
kindness
begets
kindness
—
and
that
it
costs
nothing.
I was
recently
reminded
of
this
timeless
lesson
during
the
Women,
Influence,
and
Power
in Law
conference.
On
the
first
morning,
I
was
in
Starbucks,
desperately
craving
my
much-needed
latte.
A woman
entered,
placed
her
order,
and
then
stood
next
to
me
while
waiting.
I
recognized
her as
someone
who
had
spoken
on
a
panel
the
previous
year.
Her
wit,
humor,
and
practical advice
had
left
a
lasting
impression
on
me,
and
I
remembered
her
well.
As
an
introvert,
networking
doesn’t
always
come
naturally
to
me,
and
I
hesitated
over
whether
to
speak.
But
I
decided
to
overcome
my
shyness.
Turning
to
her,
I
honestly
choked
out, “Excuse
me,
you
were
a
panelist
last
year,
right?
Your
presentation
was
fantastic.”
Her
face
lit
up
with
a
genuine
smile,
and
she
thanked
me.
That
small
moment
sparked
a
simple
conversation
as
we
walked
to
the
conference
together.
I
learned
she
was
presenting
again this
year
and
that
she
had
recently
started
a
new
job.
I
shared
briefly
about
my
own
practice
and
my
hopes
for
the
conference.
Later,
I
attended
her
presentation,
and
she
knocked
it
out
of
the
park.
At
the
start,
she mentioned
that
someone
had
praised
her
for
her
previous
presentation
that
morning
—
words
that
boosted
her
confidence
and
energized
her
for
her
own
performance.
That
acknowledgment,
coming
from
a
stranger
over
coffee,
had
made
a
real
difference
in
her
demeanor
and
motivation.
Reflecting
on
that
day,
I
felt
a
warm
sense
of
connection
and
realization:
just
a
few
sincere
words
can
have
a
profound
and
lasting
impact
on
someone
else’s
confidence
and
day. Small
acts
of
kindness
ripple
outward,
creating
positivity
that
benefits
everyone
involved.
To
my
surprise,
later
that
evening,
my
new
acquaintance
posted
on
LinkedIn
about
her presentation
—
and
she
tagged
me.
She
is
a
highly
respected,
nationally
recognized
general counsel.
She
didn’t
need
to
tag
me,
yet
she
chose
to
do
so
—
an
act
of
kindness
that
cost her
nothing
but
meant
everything.
Her
gesture
was
both
empowering
and
uplifting,
a reminder
of
how
promoting
and
lifting
others
up
is
a
simple
act
with
profound
effects.
The
Lesson
Here
Promoting
and
encouraging
others
is
free
—
yet
priceless.
A
kind
word,
a simple
compliment,
or
a
moment
of
recognition
can
inspire
confidence,
strengthen relationships,
and
foster
a
culture
of
support.
Kindness
costs
nothing
but
can
create
ripples of
positivity
that
last
far
beyond
the
moment.
Always
remember:
kindness
begets
kindness, and
it’s
the
small
acts
that
often
make
the
biggest
difference.
Jeanine
M.
Donohue
is
a
member
of
Buchalter’s
Litigation
Practice
Group
and
Wineries,
Vineyards
and
Breweries
Practice
Group.
She
practices
in
the
firm’s
St.
Helena
and
San
Francisco
offices.
With
over
30
years
of
experience,
Jeanine
is
a
big
picture
strategist
who
quickly
appreciates
the
30,000
foot
major
issues,
while
also
being
attentive
to
the
nuances
and
important
details
of
each
matter
she
handles.
Jeanine
maintains
a
broad
litigation
practice
that
includes
insurance
recovery,
commercial,
real
estate
and
products
liability.
Since
2013,
Jeanine
has
served
as
Outside
General
Counsel
to
four
active
524(g)
settlement
trusts
with
over
$1
billion
in
assets.
She
manages
all
outside
trust
litigation
including
insurance
coverage
litigation,
bankruptcy
and
adversary
proceedings.
The
docket
just
got
personal
for
one
federal
judge
—
because
the
only
thing
higher
than
the
federal
bench
was
allegedly
his
blood-alcohol
level.
Judge
Thomas
L.
Ludington
of
the
Eastern
District
of
Michigan
is
facing
misdemeanor
DUI
charges
after
a
fall
crash
that
police
say
involved
a
“super
drunk”
blood-alcohol
level
of
more
than
twice
the
legal
limit.
According
to
Michigan
state
police,
this
past
October,
Ludington’s
vehicle
hit
multiple
traffic
signs
and
later
crashed,
deploying
an
airbag.
A
subsequent
test
allegedly
showed
a
BAC
of
0.17
or
higher
—
enough
to
trigger
the
state’s
enhanced
“super
drunk”
law.
As
noted
by
the
Midland
Daily
News,
the
judge’s
exact
blood-alcohol
level
has
not
been
made
public.
Ludington
was
charged
with
operating
a
vehicle
while
intoxicated
and
operating
with
a
blood
alcohol
content
of
0.17
or
more,
and
was
released
on
a
$500
bond.
He
pleaded
not
guilty
to
the
charges
on
October
6,
and
has
continued
to
hear
cases
while
awaiting
trial.
Ludington’s
jury
trial
is
set
for
February
27.
Support
resources
exist
for
lawyers,
legal
professionals,
and
law
students
struggling
with
alcohol
use,
and
reaching
out
for
help
is
a
responsible
and
constructive
step.
If
you
or
someone
you
know
is
in
need
of
help,
please
call
a lawyer
assistance
program in
your
state.
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.
After
taking
a
hacksaw
to
nearly
a
century’s
worth
of
congressionally
approved
independent
agencies,
the
Supreme
Court
appeared
to
hit
a
wall
during
oral
argument
over
Trump’s
attempted
firing
of
Federal
Reserve
Governor
Lisa
Cook.
The
Unitary
Executive
Theory
is
all
fun
and
games
until
the
justices
start
worrying
about
their
personal
finances.
Meanwhile,
the
Department
of
Justice
now
takes
the
position
that
the
text
of
the
Alien
Enemies
Act
would
have
authorized
the
unilateral
deportation
of
the
Beatles
and
the
Rolling
Stones
for
being
part
of
the
“British
Invasion.”
Finally,
Willkie
Farr
hit
with
massive
lawsuit
alleging
the
firm
helped
out
a
former
client’s
fraud.
If
you’re
as
old
as
I
am,
you
remember
when
drafting
a
document
meant
scribbling
illegibly
on
a
yellow
legal
pad,
then
typing
your
chicken
scratch
up
on
an
electric
typewriter
and
eventually
a
PC
or
Mac.
Over
time,
as
most
of
us
acclimated
to
technology,
we
slowly
and
sometimes
reluctantly
trained
ourselves
to
draft
directly
at
the
keyboard
which
became
the
default
mechanism
to
create
work
product.
This
isn’t
a
nostalgia
play
but
rather,
an
example
of
how
technology
rewires
how
we
work.
And
we’re
on
the
cusp
of
the
same
shift
again.
Only
this
time
the
jump
isn’t
from
paper
to
keyboard
but
keyboard
to
voice.
And
while
you
may
be
thinking
that
you’ll
never
surrender
the
written
word,
there
are
compelling
reasons
why
solos
and
smalls
should
make
voice
their
drafting
tool
of
choice
in
an
AI
age.
Voice
Has
Come
a
Long
Way
Although
dictation
has
been
around
for
at
least
a
century
(first
through
human
scribes,
then
through
more
rudimentary
tools
like
Dragon
Dictation),
it
wasn’t
until
recently
that
AI-powered
transcription
was
truly
ready
for
prime
time.
Modern
speech
recognition
systems
routinely
hit
90%
accuracy
in
quiet
conditions
with
decent
microphones,
and
newer
models
continue
to
improve.
At
the
same
time,
the
underlying
voice
AI
market
is
expected
to
climb
from
about
$3.14
billion
in
2024
to
a
projected
$47.5
billion
by
2034,
which
reflects
the
fact
that
businesses
are
actually
deploying
these
tools
at
scale.
So
if
your
last
experience
with
dictation
was
a
clunky
desktop
program
that
mangled
half
your
sentences,
it’s
time
to
take
a
second
look.
The
Speed
Advantage
Everyone
Already
Knows
About
Let’s
start
with
the
obvious
advantage
of
voice:
it’s
faster
than
typing.
A
Stanford
study
found
that
speaking
is
3x
faster
than
typing
-or
150
words
per
minute
for
speech
versus
40
words
per
minute
for
the
average
typist.
Even
professional
typists
cap
out
around
65-75
words
per
minute.
Do
the
math:
A
500-word
client
email
takes
12.5
minutes
to
type
but
only
4
minutes
to
dictate
which
represents
a
68%
time
savings.
For
busy
solo
and
small
firm
practitioners,
the
time
saved
can
add
up
to
10+
hours
back
per
week.
Voice
also
saves
time
by
letting
you
work
while
you’re
doing
something
else.
Instead
of
leaving
court,
climbing
into
your
car,
and
trying
to
thumb
out
a
few
cryptic
notes
on
your
phone
in
the
parking
lot,
you
can
hit
record
and
dictate
a
full
summary
of
the
hearing
while
you
drive.
By
the
time
you
walk
back
into
your
office,
that
stream-of-consciousness
recap
has
already
been
transcribed
into
a
written
summary,
ready
to
drop
into
your
file,
your
practice
management
system,
or
a
draft
motion.
For
solos
and
small
firms,
that
kind
of
“found
time”
between
locations
is
often
the
only
place
you
can
reclaim
an
hour
from
an
already
overscheduled
day.
A
Better
Way
to
Tackle
the
Blank
Page
Speech
is
also
more
effective
in
tackling
the
blank-page
problem.
I
don’t
know
about
you
but
for
me,
the
conventional
advice
to
“just
write
anything”
to
overcome
writer’s
block
never
worked.
Even
a
minute
of
staring
at
the
resulting
clunky
text
was
too
demoralizing.
But
when
you
talk
instead
of
type,
you
can
freely
think
out
loud,
wander,
and
circle
back.
AI
can
capture
your
ramblings,
clean
up
the
tangents,
and
tighten
the
structure
so
that
by
the
time
you
see
it
on
the
screen,
it
already
looks
like
a
real
draft
instead
of
a
mess
you
have
to
rescue.
Voice
Preserves
Authenticity
Voice
also
preserves
authenticity.
It
can
also
help
us
communicate
our
clients’
position
more
effectively.
Increasingly,
clients
are
relying
on
AI
to
summarize
their
case
when
they
reach
out
for
help
—
which
can
flatten
their
unique
voice.
But
giving
clients
a
tool
—
like
an
AI
chatbot
or
a
transcribed
intake
interview
—
can
capture
your
clients’
exact
language
verbatim,
and
make
their
story
more
authentic.
As
for
lawyers,
you
can
deploy
the
idioms
and
cadence
you
want
to
preserve
in
your
writing
and
instruct
AI
to
retain
your
unique
voice
even
as
it
cleans
up
the
grammatical
errors
and
verbal
tics.
For
all
of
its
benefits,
voice
won’t
work
for
every
scenario
—
particularly
for
the
kind
of
complicated
precision
writing
required
for
an
appellate
brief,
a
multi-footnote
law
review
article,
or
a
contract
for
a
billion-dollar
transaction.
Still,
there
are
a
myriad
of
other
use
cases
such
as
demand
letters
and
settlement
negotiation
narratives,
internal
memos,
and
case
strategy
and
client
communications.
And
yes,
you’ll
need
to
edit
and
refine
—
but
you
have
to
do
that
with
any
writing.
Tips
to
Implement
Voice
So,
if
you’ve
made
the
decision
to
use
voice,
the
next
question
is:
what
should
you
use
to
capture
it?
Wispr
Flow
has
emerged
as
a
quiet
gold
standard
among
AI‑savvy
lawyers,
thanks
to
its
powerful
engine,
strong
accuracy,
and
seamless
integrations
into
legal
workflows.
Google
Docs
Voice
Typing
is
also
surprisingly
good
for
something
that’s
free
and
already
sitting
in
most
lawyers’
toolkits.
And
nearly
every
major
AI
platform
you’re
already
using
—
Perplexity,
Claude,
ChatGPT
—
now
offers
some
kind
of
built-in
voice
recording
mode,
so
you
can
talk
through
an
issue
and
get
a
cleaned-up
transcript
or
draft
back
instead
of
staring
down
a
blank
page.
The
same
ethics
cautions
that
apply
to
every
other
use
of
AI
govern
here.
Choose
a
platform
that
doesn’t
train
on
your
recordings,
uses
strong
security,
and
gives
you
control
over
retention.
If
you’re
recording
or
transcribing
client
conversations,
always
obtain
informed
consent.
Voice
is
not
just
a
new
input
method;
it’s
a
way
for
solos
and
small
firms
to
move
faster
while
still
retaining
authenticity.
When
you
combine
modern
transcription
with
light
AI
cleanup,
you
get
drafts
that
keep
your
authentic
voice
and
your
clients’
real
stories,
while
reclaiming
hours
you
can’t
afford
to
waste
at
the
keyboard.
If
you’re
serious
about
staying
human
in
an
AI-driven
market,
making
voice
your
choice
is
one
of
the
simplest,
highest-leverage
moves
you
can
make.
Carolyn
Elefant
is
one
of
the
country’s
most
recognized
advocates
for
solo
and
small
firm
lawyers.
She
founded
MyShingle.com
in
2002,
the
longest-running
blog
for
solo
practitioners,
where
she
has
published
thousands
of
articles,
resources,
and
guides
on
starting,
running,
and
growing
independent
law
practices.
She
is
the
author
of
Solo
by
Choice,
widely
regarded
as
the
definitive
handbook
for
launching
and
sustaining
a
law
practice,
and
has
spoken
at
countless
bar
events
and
legal
conferences
on
technology,
innovation,
and
regulatory
reform
that
impacts
solos
and
smalls.
Elefant
also
develops
practical
tools
like
the AI
Teach-In to
help
small
firms
adopt
AI
and
she
consistently
champions
reforms
to
level
the
playing
field
for
independent
lawyers.
Alongside
this
work,
she
runs
the
Law
Offices
of
Carolyn
Elefant,
a
national
energy
and
regulatory
practice
that
handles
selective
complex,
high-stakes
matters.
WASHINGTON
—
The
deployment
of
National
Guard
and
active-duty
Marine
forces
to
several
US
cities
cost
American
taxpayers
around
$496
million
in
the
last
six
months
of
2025,
according
to
an
official
government
estimate.
And
if
those
deployments
were
to
continue
at
end-of-2025
sizes,
it
would
cost
approximately
$93
million
per
month,
according
to
a
new
estimate
by
Congressional
Budget
Office
(CBO)
Director
Phillip
Swagel.
The
information
was
revealed
in
a
letter
sent
in
response
to
an
inquiry
by
Sen.
Jeff
Merkley,
D-
Ore.,
the
ranking
member
of
the
Senate
Committee
on
the
Budget.
Furthermore,
Swagel
gave
a
general
cost
estimate
of
$18
million
to
$21
million
per
month
for
a
1,000
member
National
Guard
deployment,
stating
that
the
exact
cost
depends
on
the
cost-of-living
in
the
city
in
which
they
are
deployed
to.
Expenses
were
estimated
based
on
factors
such
as
pay
and
benefits
when
Guardsmen
are
deployed,
lodging
away
from
home
stations,
cost
of
food,
and
transportation
for
personnel.
Over
the
second
half
of
2025,
the
Trump
administration
deployed
the
National
Guard
and
Marines
to
six
US
cities:
Los
Angeles,
California;
Washington,
D.C.;
Memphis,
Tennessee;
Portland,
Oregon;
Chicago,
Illinois;
and
New
Orleans,
Louisiana.
The
New
Orleans
deployment
was
not
factored
into
the
June-December
estimate
as
it
“occurred
at
the
end
of
the
year.”
The
future
of
domestic
deployments
was
also
left
uncertain
in
the
letter,
with
Swagel
acknowledging
legal
barriers
the
Trump
administration
has
faced
in
regard
to
the
Guard
presence
in
US
cities.
*
Trump
accuses
Minneapolis
mayor
of
“very
serious
violation
of
the
law”
because
the
mayor
is
obeying
a
Supreme
Court
precedent
written
by
well-known
leftist…
Antonin
Scalia.
[Time]
*
Meanwhile,
a
Minnesota
federal
judge
blocked
Homeland
Security’s
current
indiscriminate
sweep
and
ordered
the
release
of
those
recently
detained.
[Courthouse
News
Service]
*
Seventh
Circuit
digs
into
AI
privacy
settlement
that
gave
plaintiffs
a
cut
of
the
defendant.
[National
Law
Journal]
*
Judges
will
come
together
to
better
understand
AI
and
its
implications
for
the
justice
system.
[Legaltech
News]
*
Spider-Man
testifies
in
Goldstein
trial.
[Law360]
*
Lawsuit
hopes
to
block
FEMA
staffing
cuts.
[Reuters]
*
Inter
American
back
in
ABA
compliance.
Congrats.
[ABA
Journal]
Harmeet
Dhillon
and
Ed
Whelan
Go
At
It:
I’m
not
saying
they
had
nothing
better
to
do
with
their
lives,
but
I’m
also
not
not
saying
it.
Judges
Are
Fed
Up
With
The
DOJ:
If
you’re
going
to
make
a
goofy
argument,
at
least
do
the
work
of
supporting
it.
Regional
Law
Schools
Weighs
Merits
Of
Merging:
Is
making
more
money
worth
leaving
the
community?
Open
Racism
As
Networking
Tool:
The
“I
HATE
BLACK
PEOPLE”
lady
works
for
America
First
Legal
Foundation
now.
Never
Too
Late
To
Gamble:
Tom
Goldstein
called
the
government’s
bluff.
Pocket
Watching
Is
Okay
When
We
Do
It!:
Answer
our
survey,
please
and
thanks.
Kathryn
