Category: News Feeds

White-Collar
Crime
Matters
If
You
Disrespect
Trump:
It’s
a
very
clear
“We
go
after
our
political
enemies”
message.
The
Art
Of
Saying
Goodbye:
Here
are
some
easy
guidelines
for
telling
the
firm
adios.
Tish
James
Is
Unscratched:
No
luck
on
that
indictment.
Sorry
Trump!
NYT
Sues
DOD
And
Pete
Hegseth:
They’re
fighting
to
ask
the
questions
the
public
needs
answered.
Spread
The
Holiday
Spirit!:
Send
in
your
holiday
themed
cards
for
our
17th
Holiday
Card
Contest!

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

Which
Biglaw
firm
was
counsel
for
Netflix
in
its
$83
billion
acquisition
of
Warner
Bros
Discovery?

Hint:
Debevoise
&
Plimpton
and
Wachtell,
Lipton
represented
Warner
Bros
in
the
deal.

See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.

The
deadline
for
extending
the
Affordable
Care
Act
subsidies
is
approaching
this
month.
This
is
happening
even
as
consumers
who
depend
on
the
ACA
Marketplace
are
faced
with
the
tough
decision.
Should
they
forego
health
plans
that
will
no
longer
be
affordable
for
them
once
the
subsidies
expire
or
hope
that
Congress
will
reach
a
bipartisan
agreement
to
extend
the
subsidies
until
workable
alternatives
can
be
hashed
out
and
approved?
This
issue
was
the
primary
focus
for
the
latest
episode
of
the
Debunked
podcast,
hosted
by
MedCity
News
Editor-in-Chief
Arundhati
Parmar
and
Samir
Batra,
managing
partner
of
Health
Innovation
Pitch.

With
93%
of
ACA
Marketplace
plan
members
(22
million
people)
relying
on
tax
credits
set
to
expire
at
the
end
of
the
year
and
open
enrollment
scheduled
to
close
December
15,
“We’re
between
a
rock
and
a
hard
place,”
as
Arundhati
aptly
put
it.
At
the
time
of
recording,
the
Senate
was
expected
to
vote
December
9
on
whether
to
extend
the
subsidies.

Members
of
Congress,
especially
those
up
for
re-election
in
2026,
understand
the
risks
of
rejecting
subsidy
extensions.
Republican
Senators

Rick
Scott
of
Florida,
who

led
a
company
responsible
for
what
was
once
considered
the
largest
Medicare
fraud
in
U.S.
history,
and

Bill
Cassidy
of
Louisiana
have
come
up
with
proposals
focused
on
making
more
use
of
healthcare
savings
accounts.

The
conversation
also
focused
on
the
latest
efforts
to
make
drugs
more
affordable,
particularly
GLP-1
drugs.
Discounting
these
costly
drugs
could
pave
the
way
for
a
big
reduction
in
the
prevalence
of
chronic
diseases
associated
with
obesity,
which
lines
up
with
the
MAHA
initiative
led
by
HHS
Secretary
Robert
Kennedy
Jr.
But
these
efforts
also
raise
questions.
The
drugs
are
only
effective
for
keeping
weight
off
if
the
people
taking
them
also
change
their
lifestyles
to
include
more
exercise
and
healthier
diet
options.
There
is
also
the
question
of
whether
drug
development
supply
chains
can
match
the
demand.

This
episode
of
Debunked
closes
out
2025.
The
next
episode
will
air
in
February.

You
can
access
the
podcast
here:

Short-form
videos
at
varying
lengths
have
been
popularized
across
a
variety
of
digital
surfaces
over
the
past
few
years.
The
shortest
of
these
videos,
hovering
in
the
15-second
range,
present
a
particularly
compelling
option
for
law
firm
marketing
funnels
because
they
have
the
potential
to
grab
potential
customers’
attention
quickly
and
convey
an
impression
of
value
founded
in
legal
acumen
within
a
comparably
short
period
of
time.
Video
content
posted
to
social
media
spaces
additionally
tends
to
have
a
cumulative
effect
(thanks
to
the
frustrating-yet-fascinating
properties
of
the
algorithms
that
drive
these
ecosystems)
in
which
discovering
any
one
video
tends
to
increase
that
chances
that
a
user
who
pauses
to
view
that
video
will
see
more
from
the
same
law
firm.
When
used
as
the
basis
for
a
marketing
funnel,
15-second
“micro-videos”
can
function
as
efficient
tools
for
prompting
potential
clients
to
reach
out
and
book
their
consultations.

How
Do
Marketing
Funnels
Work?

The
digital
marketing
industry
is
full
of
“jargon”
terms
that
serve
a
genuine
function
as
a
type
of
shorthand
for
those
working
in
marketing
and
adjacent
fields,
but
can
easily
seem
opaque
to
individuals
in
other
professions.
Even
if
you
already
know
you
want
to
work
with
a
digital
marketing
agency
to
develop
your
law
firm
content
strategy
and
prepare
most
or
all
of
the
materials
for
distribution,
knowing
what
these
industry
insiders
mean
by
terms
like
“marketing
funnel”
puts
you
in
position
to
ask
important
questions
and
take
an
active
role
in
determining
your
law
firm’s
voice
and
overall
marketing
vision.

What
Is
a
Marketing
Funnel,
Anyway?

A marketing
funnel is
a
thought
construct
marketers
use
to
conceptualize
the
“stages”
customers
go
through
on
their
way
to
making
a
purchase.
The
funnel
represents
an
idealized
version
of
this
process,
with
the
customer’s
level
of
interest
and
intentionality
increasing
as
they
are
guided
through
a
series
of
progressively
more
and
more
focused
steps,
created
by
the
marketing
team
(thus
mimicking
the
narrowing
of
a
funnel,
guiding
potential
customers
toward
a
transaction
in
a
way
that
is
intended
to
imitate
the
way
a
funnel
ensures
that
liquids
can
be
poured
through
the
mouth
of
a
container
without
spilling
out
over
the
edges).

Reality
is
of
course
much
messier
than
this
stylized
representation,
but
many
digital
marketing
professionals
find
the
funnel
construct
a
useful
touchpoint
as
they
are
designing
content
and
making
strategic
user
experience
(UX)
decisions
to
encourage
progression
through
the
stages.
The
goal
is
to
meet
potential
customers
“where
they
are”
at
varying
stages
of
their
decision-making
process,
in
order
to
more
effectively
engage
them
through
targeted
content.
While
they
can
be
labor-intensive
to
produce,
15-second
micro-video
clips
can
often
be
a
compelling
tool
for
attracting
interest
and
communicating
value
at
key
stages
in
this
process.

Marketing
Funnel
Structure

That
the
funnel
is
a
conceptual
tool
used
for
marketers’
convenience,
more
than
a
realistic
description
of
any
individual’s
actual
experience
of
gathering
information
and
deciding
to
conduct
a
“transaction,”
is
demonstrated
by
the
wide
variability
in
the
number
of
stages
digital
marketing
professionals
specify
for
their
funnels.
If
you
spend
any
significant
time
browsing
content
related
to
marketing
funnels,
you
will
see
that
leaders
in
the
industry
may
identify
as
few
as
three
stages,
or
as
many
as
seven.

Generally,
the
greater
the
number
of
stages
specified,
the
more
precise
the
granularity
of
the
conceptual
model.
How
much
precision
is
needed
may
depend
on
your
overall
marketing
goal
for
a
particular
project
or
campaign.
As
a
rule
of
thumb,
in
digital
marketing
funnel
stages
are
understood
to
run
in
tandem
with
customers’
“intent,”
often
inferred
from
their
search
queries.
The
collation
of
funnel
to
search
intent
is
imperfect
because
not
all
potential
customers
enter
the
funnel
through
search,
but
to
a
significant
extent
marketing
professionals
prefer
more
detailed
funnel
stages
as
a
reference
when
it
is
strategically
important
to
understand
the
stage
of
the
funnel
suggested
by
a
particular
degree
of
intent,
or
to
understand
the
level
of
intent
that
can
be
expected
of
a
potential
customer
engaging
at
a
particular
stage
of
the
funnel.
In
other
words:
Starting
with
either
model
enables
you
to
make
some
projections
for
the
other.

Advantages
of
Micro-Video
Content
for
Conversions

One
reason
to
consider
integrating
micro-videos
into
a law
firm
marketing funnel
is
that
short-form
video
content
is
both
familiar
to
audiences
and
generally
appreciated
by
them.
These
factors,
taken
together,
position
15-second
video
clips
to
attract
attention
and
positive
engagement
across
multiple
stages
of
a
marketing
funnel,
so
in
many
cases
it
may
be
helpful
to
intersperse
these
clips
throughout
the
distinct
conceptual stages
of
the
customer
journey.
Keep
in
mind
that
potential
clients
are
more
apt
to
think
of
their
own
browsing
and
decision-making
more
as
wandering
exploration
than
as
steps
in
a
specific
journey;
it
is
the
job
of
the
marketing
team
to
entice
their
exploration
in
the
law
firm’s
direction
by
creating
a
trail
of
“bread
crumbs,”
in
the
form
of
engaging
content.

Micro-Video
Functions
in
a
Marketing
Funnel

Micro-videos
support
the
“funnel”
effect
by:

• Creating
  initial
  brand
  awareness
• Providing
  valuable
  information
• Building
  trust
• Communicating
  value

There
are,
obviously,
non-video
options
for
addressing
each
of
these
goals,
but
the
way
social
media
platforms
have
habituated
users
to
short-form
video
content
tends
to
work
in
a
marketing
funnel’s
favor,
as
15-second
clips
encourage
a
familiar
and
therefore
low-friction
progression
at
each
stage.

Thinking
Small:
Micro-Videos
Meet
Micro-Conversions

Many
content
marketing
strategists
use
the
concept
of
“micro-conversions”
to
track
the
minute
details
of
customers’
behavior
as
they
engage
with
content
at
each
stage
of
a
marketing
funnel.
Obviously
the
“big”
conversion
that
affects
your
law
firm’s
bottom
line
will
be
the
decision
to
book
a
consultation,
by
calling
your
office
phone
number
(ideally
in
the
same
page
they
are
browsing)
or
filling
in
a
scheduling
link
(also
preferentially
positioned
to
minimize
navigational
steps).
Realistically,
however,
many
people
are
not
going
to
skip
straight
from
an
initial
encounter
with
your
law
firm’s
content,
regardless
of
format,
to
booking
an
appointment
with
one
of
the
firm’s
associates.
Thinking
about
the
marketing
funnel
in
terms
of
micro-conversions
gives
marketers
a
way
to
account
for,
and
address,
the
myriad
smaller
decisions
an
individual
makes
at
each
stage
of
their
own
journeys.

Getting
on
the
Radar

Very
short
videos
(often
as
little
as
15
seconds)
can
be
an
ideal
tool
for
making
your
law
firm’s
initial
impression
on
a
potential
client’s
awareness.
YouTube
Shorts
and
TikTok
videos
both
show
occasional
“pull”
in
Google’s
search
engine
results
pages
(SERPs),
particularly
for
searches
that
are
looking
not
just
for
“informational”
content
but
more
specifically
for
process
demonstrations.
With
a
marketing
funnel,
however,
you
may
not
necessarily
want
to
rely
on
someone
actively
searching
for
what
you
have
to
offer.

Micro-Videos
on
Social
Media

One
important
advantage
of
micro-video
content
is
that
it
can
easily
be
integrated
into
your
content
strategy
across
a
variety
of
platforms,
and
on
all
of
the
major
social
media
platforms
it
is
typical
eligible
to
be
shown
to
users
you
might
not
even
have
known
to
target,
based
not
on
characteristics
you
selected
but
on
the
interests
demonstrated
by
those
users.
Social
media
integration
of
your
micro-video
funnel
content
means
that
your
law
firm
does
not
have
to
rely
exclusively
on
potential
clients’
active
legal
queries.

Getting
Customers
on
the
“Hook”

The
versatility
of
micro-videos
for
driving
conversions
at
both
macro
and
micro
levels
through
multiple
stages
of
a
funnel
means
that
marketing
funnels
centered
on
video
content
will
often
emphasize
social
media
distribution
for
an
initial
“hook”
video
that
serves
as
an
enticement
to
explore
the
law
firm’s
content
further.
This
“hook”
can
come
in
several
forms,
but
some
of
the
most
common
include:

• “How-to”
  guides:
  Identify
  a
  common
  process
  that
  often
  frustrates
  lay
  people,
  and
  give
  a
  rapid
  breakdown
  of
  the
  key
  steps.
• Illuminating
  updates:
  Point
  out
  a
  recent
  change
  in
  law
  or
  court
  decision
  whose
  effects
  are
  likely
  to
  have
  implications
  for
  your
  law
  firm’s
  ideal
  clients;
  give
  an
  “elevator
  speech”
  explanation.
• “Meet
  the
  attorney”
  or
  “behind
  the
  scenes”:
  Address
  some
  aspect
  of
  the
  practice
  of
  law
  that
  is
  typically
  invisible
  to
  people
  outside
  the
  profession;
  aim
  to
  make
  the
  reveal
  informative,
  yet
  entertaining.

Each
of
these
videos
would
need
to
be
accompanied
by
a
CTA
inviting
viewers
to
click
through
to
additional
content/information,
thereby
nudging
them
through
a
micro-conversion
and
into
the
next
stage
of
the
marketing
funnel.
Often
these
CTAs
include
the
offer
of
a
free
resource,
such
as
a
downloadable
e-book
or
an
educational
video
series
on
the
same
topic
as
the
short
clip.

Building
Trust

In
a
few
lucky
cases,
you
may
actually
net
a
conversion
straight
to
your
scheduling
link
from
one
of
your
awareness-building
videos
aimed
at
the
wide
mouth
of
the
funnel.
Generally,
however,
one
of
the
main
functions
of
micro-video
content
at
those
early
stages
is
simply
to
get
the
potential
client
off
the
social
media
platform
(where
distractions
abound)
and
into
a
digital
environment
where
they
will
be
engaged
with
your
content
exclusively
(typically
your
law
firm
website
or
a
dedicated
marketing
funnel
landing
page).
Often
there
will
be
multiple
pathways
to
this
point,
both
as
“mouths”
for
the
funnel
and
to
capture
people
who
enter
the
funnel
already
well
along
their
customer
journeys.

Because
trust
is
often
one
of
the
crucial
factors
in
the
micro-conversions
that
move
prospective
clients
from
general
awareness
and
interest
toward
a
more
particular
curiosity
about
a
specific
law
firm
or
attorney’s
approach,
an
important
role
of
micro-video
content
at
the
middle
stages
of
a
marketing
funnel
is
to
emphasize
knowledge
and
authority.
The
content
needs
to
position
you
as
a
reliable
source
of
information
in
your
practice
area,
while
remaining
accessible
to
the
general
public.
You
only
have
a
few
seconds
to
capture
attention,
so
make
them
count.
Five-point
steps
for
preparing
your
finances
for
a
divorce,
identification
of
the
specific
statute
behind
a
recent
court
decision,
the
legal
definition
of
a
term
that
is
more
loosely
used
in
casual
conversation
than
in
law:
These
all
help
to
cement
the
initial
impression
of
expertise,
while
demonstrating
a
genuine
interest
in
connecting
with
clients
and
making
complex
legal
issues
easier
for
the
non-specialist
to
grasp.

The
“Big”
Conversion:
From
Curiosity
to
Consult

Depending
on
how
finely
the
stages
of
your
marketing
funnel
are
divided,
you
may
have
numerous
trust-building
videos,
each
designed
to
foster
increased
trust
in
your
legal
expertise
and
professional
commitment
to
serving
clients,
while
also
nudging
visitors
toward
additional
micro-conversions
and
progressively
tightening
the
association
between
your
law
firm
and
the
topic
that
initially
drew
their
interest.
If
the
micro-videos
have
been
effective
through
all
these
precursor
stages,
then
at
the
narrow
end
of
the
funnel
you
have
an
opportunity
to
present
them
with
a
compelling
opportunity
to
consult
with
you
personally.

The
twin
goals
of
content
this
end
of
the
funnel
are:

• Eliminate
  as
  many
  sources
  of
  friction
  between
  the
  customer
  and
  the
  consult
  as
  possible
• Underscore
  the
  urgency
  of
  taking
  action

This
end
of
the
funnel
is
an
excellent
place
to
emphasize
the
law
firm’s
approachability,
reducing
the
disincentives
to
make
the
call.
At
the
same
time,
often
short-form
videos
at
this
stage
are
tailored
to
create
a
sense
of
urgency
centered
on
the
advantages
of
legal
advice
that
could
directly
address
customers’
personal
circumstances.
If
your
law
firm
offers
no-cost
consultations
or
specific
scheduling
accommodations,
often
CTAs
that
underscore
those
options
can
be
highly
effective
at
this
stage.
Maximize
your
conversions
by
using
the
tools
of
each
platform
where
your
content
is
delivered
to
integrate
“call
now”
buttons
or
scheduling
links.

Be
Ready
To
Take
Those
Potential
Client
Calls!

Because
online
videos
can
generate
leads
at
any
time,
day
or
night,
make
it
a
point
to
ensure
that
your
answering
system
is
set
up
to
handle
calls
that
come
through
after
normal
business
hours,
or
while
staff
are
already
occupied.
Take
steps
to
confirm
that
online
contact
forms
and
scheduling
links
are
automatically
transmitting
contact
information
to
your
law
firm’s
CRM
system
and
forwarding
information
about
each
query
to
the
appropriate
personnel.
Assign
a
staff
member
the
responsibility
of
checking
digital
accounts
daily
to
capture
any
messages
that
may
have
been
missed
(or
assign
each
potential
contact
method
to
a
specific,
separate
individual
on
your
team).
Micro-videos
can
create
momentum
driving
potential
clients
to
make
contact;
you
want
to
ensure
that
your
law
firm
lives
up
to
the
impression
your
clips
have
created.

---

Annette
Choti,
Esq.
is
the
founder
of Law
Quill,
a
legal
digital
marketing
agency
that
helps
growth-minded
law
firms
increase
their
online
visibility
and
convert
more
clients.
She
is
also
the
author
of
“Click
Magnet:
The
Ultimate
Digital
Marketing
Guide
for
Law
Firms”
and
Click
Magnet
Academy.
Annette
used
to
do
professional
comedy,
which
is
not
so
far
from
the
law
if
we
are
all
being
honest. 

We
read
about
it
every
day.
A
lawyer
uses
a
large
language
model
(LLM)
to
do
some
research.
They
copy
that
research
into
a
brief,
but
the
research
contains
cases
that
don’t
exist.
The
lawyer
is
busted,
the
judge
furious,
and
the
client
starts
looking
for
a
better
lawyer.

It
has
everyone
scratching
their
heads.
I
mean,
everyone
knows
the
AI
systems
will
do
this,
so
why
does
it
keep
happening?
A
new Cornell
University study
and
paper sheds
some
light
on
this,
the
problem
of
overreliance,
and
why
the
volcano
of
serious
AI
flaws
may
be
about
to
erupt.
Quite
simply,
the
cost
of
verifying
the
results
of
the
AI
tools
exceeds
any
savings
from
their
use.
It’s
a
paradox.

In
Part
I
of
an
examination
of
the why
a
volcano
of
AI
problems
may
be
about
to
erupt, I
looked
at
the
dangers
of
overreliance
on
AI
given
the
gaps
in
the
underlying
infrastructure.
But
there’s
more
to
the
story. The
simple
fact
is
that
AI tools
have
fundamental
reality
and
transparency
flaws
is
risky
and
downright
foolhardy.
Given
the
profound
and
breadth
of
the
impact
of
these
flaws
and
the
corresponding cost to
verify
outputs,
the
use and role
of
AI
in
legal
may end
up being more
limited
than
many
think.

The
Assumptions

As
pointed out
in
the
study,
the
assumption
fueling
the
explosion
of
AI
use
in
legal
is
that
will
save
gobs
of
time.
This
savings
will
inure
to
the
benefit
of
lawyers
and
clients,
will
lead
to
fairer
methods
of
billing
like
alternative
fee
structures,
will
get
better
results,
improve
access
to
justice,
and
lead
to
world
peace.
Well, maybe
even
the
vendors
would
not
go
so
far
as
to
guarantee
the
last
one.
But
vendors
do
seem
to
be
guaranteeing
everything
but
that. And
pundits
talk
as
if
AI
will
transform
legal
from
the
ground
up. Law
firms
are
buying
into
the
hype,
investing
in
expensive
systems
that
do
things
they
barely
understand. 

But
not
so
fast.
All
this
hinges
on
the
assumption
that
the
time
saved
will
vastly
exceed
the
additional
steps
needed
to
verify
the
output
and
that
any
issues
of
AI
with
things
like
accuracy
will
soon
be
solved. 

The
Cornell
study
throws
some
cold
water
on
all
these
assumptions and
challenges
them
head
on.

The
Cornell
Study

The
study
identifies
two fundamental
LLM flaws.
The
first
we
all
know
about:
the
propensity
of
the
systems
to
hallucinate
and
provide
inaccurate
information.
The
study
refers
to
this
flaw
as
a
reality
flaw.
It’s
a
big
problem
in
a
profession
like
law
where
being
wrong
can
have
severe
consequences.
The
second
flaw
identified by
the
study
it
calls a transparency one.
We
don’t
really
know
how
these
systems
work.

The
reality
flaw, says
the
study, stems
from
the
fact
that
generative
systems
“are
not
structurally
linked
to
reality:
namely
factual
accuracy…a
machine
learning
model
does
not
learn
the
facts
underlying
the
training
data
but
reduces
that
data
to
patterns
which
it
then
ingests
and
seeks
to
reproduce.”
And
the
study
notes
that
it’s
not
just
the
public
systems
like
ChatGPT
that
demonstrate
this
flaw,
it’s
also
the
ones
built
for
legal
as
well.

So,
the
study
concludes,
“any
output
generated
by
AI
must
be
verified
if
the
user
wishes
to
satisfy
themselves
as
to
the
accuracy
and
connection
to
reality,
of
that
output—especially
in
legal
practice.”
In
other
words,
check your cites.

The
second
flaw, one
of
transparency,
is the
black
box
problem.
It in
turn
creates
a trust issue, says
the
study.
If
you
don’t
know
how
a
decision
is
made
or
a
conclusion
is
reached,
how
can
you
trust
it? 

For a
legal system that
depends
on
reasoning
and
logic, that’s a
big
issue. I
would
phrase
it
this
way: how
can
you
rely
on
something
when
you
don’t
know
how
it
works,
how
it
reached
the
decision
it
reached,
and
you
get
different
answers
to
the
same
questions.

Use
of AI in
legal
hinges
on
the
need to be
able
to
explain
how
a
decision
was
reached.
That’s
a
cornerstone
of
how
legal
processes
and
even
the
rule
of
law
is
based.

The
study
further
concludes
that
neither
of
these
flaws
will
be
overcome
anytime
soon.

What
Does
This
Mean?

The
study
goes
on
to
talk
about
what
this
means.
It
suggests
that
the
plethora
of
cases
where
lawyers have failed to
check
cites
and
end
up
having
a
hallucinated or
inaccurate case
or
facts
recited in
filings
means
lawyers are underestimating the
flaws.
Or have
been convinced
by
providers
that
the
risks
are
negligible. 

These
lawyers have
simply
overrelied
on
a
tool
they
believed
or
were
led
or
lulled into believing was
more
accurate
than
what
it
is. The
result
so
far
has
been
a great
hue
and
cry
by
everyone
that
you have
to check
cites.
Usually
this
is
delivered
with
a
wry
grin
that
says
it’s
just
dumb
and
lazy
lawyers
to
blame. But
the
fact
is
the
problem
is
not
going
away.
In fact, it
seems
to
be
getting
worse.

It
may
be
that
the
guilty
lawyers
are
dumb
or
lazy, although
as
I
have written
before,
that’s
not
the
whole
story. But
what’s
left unsaid is
something
the
study
points
out:
“the
net
value
of
an
AI
model
in
legal
practice
can
only
be
assessed
once
the
efficiency
gain
(savings
on
time,
salary
costs,
firm
resource
costs,
etc.)
is
offset
by
the
corresponding
verification
cost
(cost
to
manually
verify
AI
outputs
for
accuracy,
completeness,
relevance,
etc.). Those
caught
with
hallucinated
cases
in
their
papers
simply
didn’t
take
the
time
to
verify
relying
on
the
AI
tool.

Because
the
demand
for
accuracy
in
legal
is
so
high,
the
study
notes,
the
verification
cost
for
many
actions
in
legal
is
too
high
to
offset
the
savings. The
study
also
concludes
that
this
cost
is
not
ameliorated
by
automated
systems
since
the
reality
and
transparency
risks
may
still
exist.
Hence what the study
calls
a verification
paradox.

And
we
see the
impact
of
this
paradox already
with
fines
imposed
by
courts
for
hallucinated
cases.
We
will
no
doubt
see
malpractice
and
ethical
violation
claims.
The
cost
of
being
wrong
in
law
is
just
too
great
to
not
verify
and
verify
thoroughly. 

Granted,
AI
can
do
lots
of
things
well
where
the
risks
of
being
wrong
are
not
that
great.
It
will
have
an
enormous
impact
in
business
and
maybe
other
professions.
But
for
law,
not
so
much:
“The
more
important
the
output,
the
more
important
it
is
to
verify
its
accuracy.”

The
study
concludes:

The
verification-value
paradox
suggests
the
net
value
of
AI
to
legal
practice
is
grossly overestimated,
due
to
an
underestimation
of
the
verification
cost.
A
proper
understanding of the costly
and
essential
nature
of
verification
leads
to
the
conclusion
that
AI’s
net
value will
often
be negligible
in
legal
practice:
that
is,
in
most
cases,
the
value
added
will
not
be
sufficient
to
justify the
corresponding
verification
cost.

The
Reality

It’s
easy
to
see
the
economic
impact
of
the
verification
paradox
when
you
compare
the
cost
of
getting
a
piece
of
work
done
by
an
LLM
with
that
done
by
a
human.
Let’s
assume
you
ask
an
LLM
to
do
some
legal
research
that
would
normally
take
you
10
hours.
You
get
the
result,
but
it’s
got
some
25
case
citations.
Now
you
have
to
a)
check
to
make
sure
every
case
exists
and
b)
make
sure
that
the
case
stands
for
the
proposition
the
LLM
says
it
does.
By
the
time
you
do
that,
you
could
very
well
spend
the
eight
hours,
if
not
more.

A Volcano
About
to
Erupt?

It
may
be
too
late
to
completely
put AI back
in
the
bottle.
But
where
it
takes
just
as
long
if
not
longer
to
verify
the
results
of
an
AI
tool
you’ve
spent
thousands
of
dollars
on,
you’re
not
going
be
predisposed
to
buy
more.
Certainly,
your
clients
aren’t
going
to
be
wild
about
your
use
of
a
tool
that
not
only
fails
to
save
them
money
but
costs
them
more
and
exposes
them
to
risk.

It’s
easy
to
envision
the
fundamental
conclusion
that
using
AI
for
many
things
is
not
worth
the
risk
and
the
cost
of
validating
its
result.
It’s
easy
to see
how this
fact will temper the enthusiasm
and
reliance
on
AI. 

We may
rapidly
conclude the
costs
and
risks
of
doing
so
are
too
high and
simply
not
worth
it
in
the
long-
and
perhaps
even
the
short-run.
When
that
happens,
a
lot
of
lawyers
are
going
to
be
caught
with
expensive
systems
that
they
don’t
need.
A
lot
of
vendors
may
have
to
go
in
other
directions.
A
lot
of
venture
capital
may
go
down
the
drain.
The
proverbial
volcano
may
be
about
to
erupt.

That’s
something
worth
considering
before
you
buy
the
next
shiny
new
AI
toy and before
you
use
AI
shortcuts
to do the
hard
work,
before
you
blindly
expect
people
you
supervise
to
do
the
right
thing
and
before
you
accept
without
question
their
work.

In
the
meantime,
check
your
citations.
Please.

---

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

Melissa
Rogozinski is
CEO
of
the
RPC
Round
Table
and
RPC
Strategies,
LLC,
a
marketing
and
advertising
firm
in
Miami,
FL. 

Last
month,

Forbes
released
its
second
annual
ranking
of

America’s
Best
Companies.
Five
hundred
businesses
are
on
the
list.
Just
one
is
a
law
firm.

That
firm
is
Maynard
Nexsen,
ranked
No.
99.
Since
the

2023
merger
between
Maynard
Cooper
&
Gale
and
Nexsen
Pruet,
the
Alabama-based
firm
has

joined
the
Am
Law
200,
earned

accolades
for
client
service,
and
now
made
it
on
to
a
list
of
the
nation’s
top
companies.

To
come
up
with
its
ranking,

Forbes
says
it
partnered
with
a
half-dozen
data
firms,
evaluating
“millions
of
data
points
for
thousands
of
companies
to
produce
a
final
list
of
500
top-quality
businesses.” 

Some
of
the
100+
metrics
include
employee
sentiment,
customer
sentiment,
media
sentiment,
financial
performance,
business
trajectory,
company
size,
workforce
stability,
workforce
diversity,
cybersecurity,
and
sustainability. 

Forbes
America’s
Best
Companies
2026
[Forbes]

Ed.
note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature,

Quote
of
the
Day.

I
just
wanted
to
share
with
children
some
stories
about
the
courage
and
sacrifice
of
the
heroes
behind
1776
who
gave
us
our
Constitution
and
our
liberties.
I
just
wanted
to
inspire
young
people
to
think
about
doing
great
things
like
that
themselves.

—
Justice
Neil
Gorsuch,
in
comments
given
to

Fox
News,
concerning
his
new
children’s
book,
“Heroes
of
1776:
The
Story
of
The
Declaration
of
Independence.”
The
book
is
set
to
be

released
in
May
2026,
just
ahead
of
the
250th
anniversary
of
the
Declaration
of
Independence.

---

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.

Todd
Blanche,
Deputy
Attorney
General
and
longtime
Trump
loyalist,
dropped
a
rhetorical
anvil
on
the
white-collar
bar
this
week
at a
conference
on
the
Foreign
Corrupt
Practices
Act.
According
to

reporting
by
POLITICO,
while
addressing
hundreds
of
lawyers
whose
job
is
literally
to
advise
clients
on
how
to
avoid
prosecution,
Blanche
warned
about
the
dangers
of
being
publicly
critical
of
the
Trump
Administration’s
white-collar
enforcement
efforts.

He
didn’t
even
try
to
subtle-code
it.
He
just…
said
the
thing
out
loud:

“If
folks
in
this
room
are
going
to
be
honest
brokers
when
counseling
clients,
posting
on
LinkedIn
or
writing
client
alerts,
the
public
narrative
should
match
the
private
one.
If
you
publicly
claim
we
are
not
enforcing
white-collar
crime
aggressively
enough,
but
privately
insist
that
your
clients
are
the
victims
of
overreach,
we
notice
that
inconsistency.”

The
nation’s
second-highest
law
enforcement
official
telling
lawyers
that
DOJ
“notices”
when
their
public
commentary
displeases
the
government
is
the
kind
of
thing
that,
not
too
long
ago,
would
set
off
every
alarm
bell
in
the
rule-of-law
universe.
Now
it’s
a
Thursday.

Blanche
wasn’t
done.
Not
even
close.

“It’s
remarkable
how
some
members
of
the
white-collar
bar
seem
to
have
an
endless
stream
of
clients
who
are
each
coincidentally
victims
of
supposed
overreach
or
weaponization,
but
still
publicly
draft
client
alerts
suggesting
that
the
department
is
not
prioritizing
white-collar
cases.
Such
a
statement
is
wrong.
White-collar
cases
are
a
significant
priority
for
President
Trump,
for
the
attorney
general
and
for
the
department.”

Nothing
chilling
about
that
at
all.

Let’s
not
forget
that,
via
Executive
Order,
Donald
Trump

paused
FCPA
enforcement
altogether
early
in
his
second
term,
claiming
that
American
businesses
were
being
unfairly
burdened
by
enforcement
“stretched
beyond
proper
bounds.”
DOJ’s

revised
guidelines
now
openly
emphasize
not
inconveniencing
U.S.
companies
operating
abroad.
Providing
this
relevant
context
to
clients
*is*
the
job.

For
the
lawyers
in
the
room,
Blanche’s
remarks
were
both
uncomfortable
and
clarifying:
the
Administration
is
building
a
world
where
criticism
of
the
government
carries
professional
risk.
White-collar
lawyers
know
the
stakes.
Their
clients
live
or
die
on
prosecutorial
discretion.
Telling
them
that
their
commentary
is
being
monitored
for
loyalty
to
the
Administration?
That’s
coercion.

Blanche
was
already
busy
last
month

announcing
“war”
on
judges
who
rule
against
the
Administration,
which
is
decidedly
not
a
normal
thing
for
a
Deputy
Attorney
General
to
say
out
loud
unless
he’s
auditioning
for
a
future
Ken
Burns
documentary
titled

The
Day
the
Rule
of
Law
Died.

Now
he’s
extending
this
war
footing
to
lawyers
themselves.
Judges,
lawyers,
journalists,
anyone
who
could
check
power
is
suddenly
in
Blanche’s
rhetorical
crosshairs.

Blanche’s
recent
moves
would
be
aggressive
taken
separately.
Together,
they’re
a
gameplan
for
authoritarianism.

MAGA
has
blown
straight
past
insulating
itself
from
criticism,
to
actively
threatening
the
people
who
provide
it.

---

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].

The
Founders
envisioned
a
strong
press
as
a
foundational
part
of
our
burgeoning
democracy.
A
strong
press
makes
it
easier
for
the
public
to
stay
informed
of
what
their
representatives
are
doing
and
to
hold
their
government
accountable
if
needed.
A
weak
press
gets
you

No
War
in
Ba
Sing
Se
scenarios
where
the
Venn
diagram
of
news
sources
and
propaganda
centers
is
a
circle.
Even
if
the
NYT

isn’t
perfectly
representative
of
American
press
coverage
and
interests,
their
legal
push
to
get
back
in
the
Pentagon
could
have
far-reaching
consequences
for
the
nation’s
news
sources.

Reuters
has
coverage:

The
New
York
Times
sued
the
U.S.
Department
of
Defense
and
Secretary
of
Defense
Pete
Hegseth
on
Thursday
in
an
effort
to
force
the
Pentagon
to
abandon
its
restrictive
new
press
policy,
the
latest
attempt
by
a
U.S.
news
organization
to
reclaim
access
to
government
spaces.

The
press
policy,
enacted
last
month,
requires
journalists
to
acknowledge
that
they
could
be
branded
security
risks
and
have
their
Pentagon
press
badges
revoked
if
they
ask
department
employees
to
disclose
classified
and
some
types
of
unclassified
information.

Why
is
the
pressure
on
the
journalists
to
not
ask
questions
that
could
involve
sensitive
information
and
not
on
the
Department
employees
to
keep
their
damned
mouths
shut?
It
is
squarely
within
the
job
description
for
journalists
to
ask
tough
questions
that
get
at
the
spirit
of
what
the
public
needs
to
know,

not
lob
softballs
about
how
bad
the
administration’s
political
enemies
are.
If
the
government
is
hiring
people
who
can’t
be
trusted
to
have
tight
lips
when
it
comes
to
classified
information,
that
means
they’ve
done
a
very
bad
job
of
vetting
their
hires.
Scapegoating
the
reporters
as
safety
risks
when
it’s
actually
your
own
personnel
isn’t
a
good
look,
Gov.

As
important
as
it
is
for
big
press
figures
like
the
Times
to
push
for
access
to
information,
they
could
also
just…
wait.
Especially
when
it
comes
to
Hegseth.
My
pet
theory
is
that
his
push
for
the
name
change
to
the
Department
of
War
was
that
he
knows
how
bad
he
is
at
defending
anything
—
including
secrets.
It
is
only
a
matter
of
time
before
the
Fox
and
Friends
talking
head
that
failed
upward

leaks
a
private
Signal
chat
or
drops
more
proof
of
war
crimes.
You’d
think
the
story

alleging
he
issued
a
double-tap
order
on
men
clinging
to
life
and
posing
no
threat
would
make
him
slow
down
with
the
public
disclosures
but
no,
dude
is
still
releasing
“Drug
Bust”
snuff
films:

The
good
news
is
that
the
law
is
on
their
side.
Even
with
the
“security
risk”
language,
it
is
hard
to
look
at
the
press
rule
as
anything
other
than
an
attempt
at
chilling
speech
that
doesn’t
conform
with
government
doxa.
The
bad
news
is
that
if
this
case
makes
it
all
the
way
to
the
Supreme
Court,
it
is
loaded
with
judges
who
are
willing
to
bend
the
law
to
their
desired
outcomes
if
it
benefits
the
Trump
administration.

New
York
Times
Sues
Pentagon
Over
Press
Access
[Reuters]

---

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.

One
of
the
small
rituals
of
law
firm
life
is
that
attorneys
frequently
send
exit
emails
to
the
colleagues
they
leave
behind
on
their
last
day
of
work. These
emails
are
usually
warm,
funny,
and
help
attorneys
leave
positive
impressions
that
might
serve
them
well
as
they
move
throughout
their
careers. During
my
time
at
four
different
law
firms
before
starting
my
own
practice,
I
received
dozens
of
such
exit
emails,
and
attorneys
should
keep
a
few
things
in
mind
when
crafting
the
perfect
one.

Be
Warm

Attorneys
often
do
not
have
the
most
positive
emotions
about
supervisors
and
co-workers. This
is
because
legal
practice
can
be
a
grind,
and
some
personalities
at
law
firms
might
be
difficult
to
handle. Indeed,
some
attorneys
leave
law
firms
since
they
simply
cannot
contend
with
managers
who
frequently
assign
them
work.

However,
it
is
usually
best
to
take
a
warm
and
thankful
tone
when
crafting
an
attorney
exit
email. Lawyers
may
wish
to
thank
the
people
with
whom
they
worked
and
reflect
on
the
growth
they
experienced
during
their
time
at
a
firm. The
legal
community
is
much
smaller
than
people
may
think,
and
there
is
a
solid
chance
that
attorneys
will
see
co-workers
on
future
matters.
Indeed,
co-workers
might
even
be
critical
for
attorneys
to
secure
opportunities
in
the
future. Accordingly,
it
is
best
not
to
burn
bridges
and
to
focus
on
the
positive
aspects
of
working
at
a
law
firm.

Be
Funny

The
best
attorney
exit
emails
I
have
ever
seen
are
hilarious
missives
that
are
laugh-out-loud
funny. Some
people
might
find
it
challenging
to
be
funny
in
the
two-dimensional
format
of
an
attorney
exit
email,
but
with
the
right
wording,
you
can
impart
a
significant
amount
of
humor. Often,
the
easiest
way
is
to
poke
gentle
fun
at
the
firm,
its
policies,
or
—
if
you’re
feeling
bold
—
the
managers. If
done
with
enough
finesse,
you
can
gain
the
respect
of
co-workers
and
depart
a
shop
with
some
levity.

One
time,
I
compiled
an
attorney
exit
email
that
I
tried
to
make
as
funny
as
possible. I
made
a
number
of
height-related
jokes
—
I
am
6
feet
8
1/2
inches
tall
—
which
seemed
like
they
landed
well. I
also
individually
thanked
all
of
the
top
brass
at
the
shop,
and
I
gave
a
nickname
to
each
of
the
partners
that
was
funny
but
not
too
mean. People
liked
that
touch,
and
some
of
the
partners
stopped
by
my
office
on
my
last
day
to
tell
me
that
they
appreciated
the
nicknames. There
is
an
extremely
delicate
balance
between
being
funny
and
mean,
but
if
you
can
strike
that
balance,
you
can
have
an
especially
memorable
exit
email.

Tell
People
Your
Plans

One
thing
some
people
forget
to
do
in
exit
emails
is
to
tell
people
what
they
will
be
doing
after
they
leave
a
shop. It
is
easy
enough
to
look
on
LinkedIn
for
details
about
a
lawyer’s
next
job,
but
if
you
tell
co-workers
about
your
plans
in
an
exit
email,
it
is
possible
that
co-workers
can
talk
with
you
about
your
plans
while
you
are
still
in
the
office.

Traditionally,
lawyers
leave
their
personal
contact
information
in
exit
emails
since
the
work
email
will
presumably
be
deactivated. These
days,
this
part
of
an
exit
email
no
longer
seems
obligatory
as
people
can
easily
find
lawyers
on
social
media.

I’d
love
to
hear
any
stories
about
exit
emails
from
readers
of
this
column,
I’m
sure
there
have
been
some
epic
ones
over
the
years. And
if
lawyers
keep
a
few
things
in
mind,
they
can
be
sure
to
write
a
notable
exit
email
that
leaves
a
positive
impression
after
they
depart
from
a
firm.

---

Jordan
Rothman
is
a
partner
of The
Rothman
Law
Firm,
a
full-service
New
York
and
New
Jersey
law
firm.
He
is
also
the
founder
of Student
Debt
Diaries,
a
website
discussing
how
he
paid
off
his
student
loans.
You
can
reach
Jordan
through
email
at jordan@rothman.law.