Category: News Feeds

There
are
two
things
Afroman
can’t
stand:

wack
rappers
and
having
his
house
raided
by
the
police
in
search
of
kidnapping
victims
and
drugs.
The
latter
happened
back
in
2022
and
was
“highly
destructive,
intrusive,
and
ultimately
fruitless.”
You
could
imagine
that
it
was
also
psychologically
jarring
—
not
only
did
the
officers
smash
down
Afroman’s
door,
they
had
their
guns
drawn
while
doing
so.
But
the
suit
for
damages
and
emotional
distress
didn’t
come
from
Afroman.

Prior
to
having
his
civil
liberties
disrupted,
Afroman
was
known
for
being
a
goofy
musician.
Like
many
artists
before
him,
Afroman
turned
his
trauma
into
art
and
released
a
song
and
music
video
that
publicized
and
mocked
the
botched
raid
on
his
home.
He
used
video
of
the
bumbling
officers
that
raided
his
home
in
the
music
video,
hoping
that
the
money
made
would
let
him
recoup
the
costs
of
their
property
damage:

In
it
he
poses
very
reasonable
questions
like
“Is
there
a
thousand
pounds
of
weed
in
my
suit
pockets?”
and
“Any
kidnapping
victims
inside
my
CD
[cases]?”
and
“Why
are
you
stealing
my
money?”
And
while
it
is
hard
to
see
in
full
—
for
obvious
reasons
—
the
video
also
shows
the
sheriffs
disconnecting
his
cameras
during
the
raid.
Turning
off
your
own
body
cam
is
bad
enough,
but
turning
off
the
house’s?!

They
claim
that
the
music
video
that
shows
what
they
did
defamed
them.
And
if
you
think
that
was
ridiculous
(it
is),
wait
until
you
read
about
the
trial.

New
York
Post
has
coverage:

A
patriotically
dressed
Afroman
clashed
with
Ohio
law
enforcement
Tuesday
—
leaving
one
deputy
in
tears
as
he
took
the
stand
in
his
bizarre
civil
trial
accusing
him
of
defamation
over
his
2022
music
video
“Lemon
Pound
Cake.”

The
51-year-old
“Because
I
Got
High”
rapper,
whose
real
name
is
Joseph
Foreman,
is
being
sued
by
the
Adams
County
Sheriff’s
Office
over
a
raid
at
his
home
in
August
2022
that
resulted
in
no
criminal
charges.

The
iconic
artist
wrote
the
song
“Lemon
Pound
Cake”
with
an
accompanying
music
video
of
actual
footage
of
the
raid
taken
from
his
home
surveillance,
which
he
hoped
would
raise
money
for
damages
stemming
from
the
fruitless
search.

“All
of
this
is
their
fault,”
Foreman,
clad
in
his
signature
coif,
a
red,
white
and
blue
suit
and
matching
sunglasses,
testified
Tuesday[.]

You
can
watch
the
video
below:

I
know
I
just
said
you

can
watch
the
video,
but
you
really

should.
It
really
ramps
up
the
absurdity
of
all
that
follows,
especially
once
you
get
to
the
closing
argument
footage.

He
used
the
names
of
the
sheriffs
that
raided
his
home,
destroyed
his
property,
and
found
nothing
in
the
songs
he
made
to
raise
money
to
cover
the
costs
of
said
raid.
Doing
so
is
obviously
protected
by
the
First
Amendment;
why
in
the
hell
would
the
Founders
want
to
create
protections
from
tyranny
but
carve
out
an
exception
that
doesn’t
let
you
name
your
tyranny-doers?
But
I
guess
the
Constitution
falls
to
the
wayside
when
government
employees’
feelings
get
hurt:

The
sheriff’s
lawyer
wants
the
jury
to
believe
that
those
tears,
along
with
being
mocked
for
breaking
into
a
man’s
home,
terrorizing
his
kids,
and
finding
nothing
means
that
Afroman
needs
to
pay
them
around
$4M:

@imnotalawyerbut

Afroman
Trial
closing
arguments:
attorney
Robert
Kingler
asks
jurors
to
award
the
officers
a
total
of
3.9
million
dollars
for
the
defamation
and
invasion
of
privacy
claims.
$1.5
million
to
Lisa
Phillips
$1
million
to
Brian
Newland
$1
million
to
Randy
Walters
400k
split
between
Shawn
Grooms,
Shawn
Cooley,
Justin
Cooley
and
Michael
Estep)
Jurors
ultimately
get
to
decide.

♬
original
sound
–
Im
Not
A
Lawyer
But

Aggressors
getting
their
feelings
hurt
and
suing
their
victims
for
telling
people
what
happened
is
a
maddening
thing
to
see.
This
isn’t
far
off
from
a
jury
deciding
that
a
mother
needs
to
pay
$3.2m
to
one
of
the
bullies
that
made
her
son
drink
piss
mixed
with
apple
juice

because
the
bully’s
feelings
got
hurt.

Let’s
hope
the
jury
has
enough
sense
to
not
make
Afroman
suffer
another
time.

Afroman
Clashes
With
Cops
In
Court
—
As
One
Officer
Left
In
Tears
Over
Music
Video
About
Failed
2022
Police
Raid
[New
York
Post]

---

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
boat
builder
who
is
learning
to
swim
and
is
interested
in
rhetoric,
Spinozists
and
humor.
Getting
back
in
to
cycling
wouldn’t
hurt
either.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected]
and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Women
continue
to
soar
to
new
heights
in
Biglaw,
and
now
one
of
the
top
firms
in
the
country
is
welcoming
a
woman
into
its
top
leadership
role.

Weil
Gotshal
&
Manges
recently
announced
that

Ramona
Nee,
who
currently
serves
as
one
of
the
firm’s
two
co-managing
partners
alongside

Jonathan
Soler, will
become
its
next
executive
partner.
Nee’s
promotion
is
historic
in
that
she
will
be
Weil’s
third
ever
executive
partner,
and
its
first
female
executive
partner
in
history.
She
will
be
taking
over
for

Barry
Wolf,
who
will
retain
his
role
until
the
beginning
of
2027.
At
the
same
time,
Soler
will
become
Weil’s
sole
managing
partner.
Once
Wolf
retires
at
the
end
of
next
year,
Nee
will
also
assume
his
duties
as
chair
of
the
firm’s
management
committee.

Nee,
a
graduate
of
Boston
University
School
of
Law,
joined
the
firm
in
2002
from
Boston
firm
Hutchins
Wheeler
&
Dittmar.
Right
now,
she
serves
as
co-chair
of
the
firm’s
U.S.
private
equity
practice
and
co-managing
partner
of
its
Boston
office.
Wolf
shared
some
inspirational
words
about
Nee
in
an
interview
with
the

American
Lawyer:

“The
management
committee
fully
endorsed
the
decision,”
Wolf
said.
“There
was
no
acrimony
when
we
made
the
recommendation.
We
did
it
the
Weil
way:
no
election,
no
pitting
people
against
each
other,
and
always
thinking
about
the
firm
first.”
…

“[Romona]
has
risen
to
the
occasion
in
every
aspect
of
her
professional
life,
dealing
with
clients,
leadership
issues
and
the
like.
She
was
not
asking
for
this
job.
But
her
loyalty
and
devotion
to
the
firm,
as
well
as
her
ability
to
handle
difficult
situations,
made
it
an
easy
choice.”

Nee,
who
is
brimming
with
optimism
about
her
new
role,
offered
the
following
in
a

statement:
“I
look
forward
to
working
with
[Barry,]
the
Management
Committee,
and
all
of
my
fellow
partners
during
the
transition
period
as
we
continue
to
serve
our
clients,
support
our
people
and
continue
attracting
the
best
talent
in
the
legal
profession.”

Congratulations
to
Ramona
Nee
on
her
historic
ascent
to
the
top
as
Weil
Gotshal’s
executive
partner!

Weil
Names
Ramona
Y.
Nee
Executive
Partner,
Succeeding
Barry
M.
Wolf
[Weil]

Weil
Picks
Successor
to
Longtime
Leader
Barry
Wolf
[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 Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.

Filevine’s
LOIS
is
the
first
platform
to
embed
intelligence
into
the
DNA
of
legal
work
and
unite
people,
processes,
and
data
for
unmatched
speed,
strategy,
and
outcomes.

In
this
guide,
our
friends
at
Filevine
share
seven
ways
LOIS
can
save
your
team thousands
of
hours
per
year.

Built
into
Filevine,

LOIS
is
the
Legal
Operating
Intelligence
System
that
embeds
intelligence
into
the
DNA
of
your
legal
work.
 

Sign
up
to
receive
your
free
guide!

  

Every
seasoned
litigator
knows
sometimes
you
have
a
bad
day
in
court,
but
this
is
really,
really
bad.
Because
whatever
fresh
hell
is
currently
unfolding
inside
the
U.S.
Attorney’s
Office
for
the
District
of
New
Jersey,
where
the
vibes
are
so
rancid
that
a
federal
judge
literally
had
a
prosecutor
shown
the
door
mid-hearing,
is
off
the
charts.

At
a
sentencing
hearing
this
Monday,
Judge
Zahid
Quraishi
had
some
questions
about
the
utter
chaos
going
on
with
the
leadership
of
the
New
Jersey
U.S.
Attorney’s
Office.

Enter
Supervisory
AUSA
Mark
Coyne,
who
was
in
the
courtroom
to
support
another
prosecutor
but,
and
this
is
key,
had
not
filed
a
notice
of
appearance.
Quraishi
made
it
crystal
clear
that
Coyne
could
sit
there
and
pass
notes
like
a
middle
schooler
avoiding
eye
contact
during
algebra,
but
speaking
was
off-limits.

But
since
Above
the
Law
is
writing
about
it,
you
know
he
spoke
anyway.

You
see,
Judge
Quraishi
was
asking
about
the
role
of
Alina
Habba.
You’ll
recall
Habba
was
installed
as
interim
U.S.
Attorney
for
New
Jersey.
And
when
her
interim
appointment
expired,
the
court
declined
to
bless
any
effort
to
make
her
permanent
without
that
pesky
constitutional
step
known
as
Senate
confirmation.
The
Trump
admin’s
response?
What
if
we
just…
call
her
something
else?
And
made
her
Acting
U.S.
Attorney.
But
the
vibes-based
leadership
role
was
also
rejected
by
courts
that
determined
Habba
was
illegally
holding
the
position.
But
instead
of,
say,
appointing
someone
legally
and
going
through
that
Senate
approval
process,
the
powers
that
be
pivoted
to
what
can
only
be
described
as
a
three-raccoons-in-a-trench-coat
approach
to
governance,
installing
Philip
Lamparello,
Jordan
Fox,
and
Ari
Fontecchio
as
a
trio
that
is
now
collectively
running
the
office.
Which…
was
also
determined
to
be
illegal
by
Judge
Matthew
Brann,
sitting
by
appointment
from
the
Middle
District
of
Pennsylvania
(though
that
decision
was
stayed,
pending
appeal).

That
loaded
history
is
what
motivated
Coyne
to
speak,
despite
being
told
not
to.
And
the
judge
did
*not*
take
kindly
to
having
his
instructions
ignored.
“You
didn’t
file
a
notice
of
appearance.
You
don’t
get
to
blindside
the
court
and
do
whatever
it
is
you
guys
want
to
do,”
Quraishi
said.
“So
if
you
continue
to
speak,
you
can
leave.”

Not
taking
the
rebuke
with
grace,
Coyne
continued
speaking.

The
judge
then
called
for
security
and
instructed
Coyne
to
leave.
To
his
credit,
Coyne
eventually
took
the
hint
and
exited
without
needing
to
be
physically
escorted
out.

The
judge
didn’t
just
eject
Coyne,
but
he
made
clear
he
has
serious
concerns
about
the
legitimacy
of
the
people
running
the
office.
He
has
now
refused
to
proceed
with
sentencing
until
the
leadership
trio
appears
in
court
and
explains
themselves.

“They’re
going
to
answer
my
questions
about
who
is
running
the
office
and
how,”
Quraishi
said.

And
if
that
weren’t
enough,
Quraishi
delivered
a
line
that
should
make
every
career
prosecutor
in
New
Jersey
want
to
crawl
under
their
desks:
“Generations
of
Assistant
U.S.
Attorneys
had
built
the
goodwill
of
that
office
for
your
generation
to
destroy
it
within
a
year.”

Oof.

The
DOJ’s
response
to
the
debacle
is
a
typical
Trumpian
nonstatement,
saying
prosecutors
remain
empowered
to
“aggressively
enforce
our
nation’s
laws
and
keep
people
safe.”
You
know,
it’d
probably
be
easier
for
NJ
prosecutors
to
do
that
if
the
administration
would
actually
put
an
appointee
up
for
confirmation…
like
the
Constitution
requires.

It
was
Legalweek
last
week,
and
we
discuss
the
big
happenings
from
the
show
—

which
is
pretty
much
all
AI
talk
—
but
while
we
saw
splashy
product
announcements
about
the
future
of
working
as
a
lawyer
within
an
AI-enhanced
workflow,
an
assistant
U.S.
Attorney
got
bounced
from
the
job
for

letting
AI
run
too
much
of
the
workflow.
But
the
most
imaginative
large
language
models
wouldn’t
have
predicted

opening
a
federal
judicial
opinion
with
the
phrase
“swinging
dicks.”
That
takes
a
special
level
of
deranged
that’s
pure
Judge
Lawrence
VanDyke.
The
certified
non-qualified
occupant
of
a
Ninth
Circuit
seat
kicked
off
an
official
taxpayer
funded
rant
about
wokeness
framed
as
vulgar
trolling
to
appeal
to
the
White
House.
His
colleagues
—
most
of
them
anyway
—
issued
a
plea
for
decorum,
that
went
basically
nowhere.

When
I

was
reporting
from
Ukraine
this
fall,
I
learned
to
sleep
through
the
air
raid
sirens.
The
local
authorities
sounded
them
every
time
any
kind
of
munition
was
headed
remotely
in
our
direction,
even
though
most
often
the
Russian
drones
and
missiles
veered
off
to
targets
elsewhere
before
impact.

When
Russian
forces
eventually
did
massively
bomb
Lviv,
the
sound
that
woke
me
in
the
early
morning
hours
was
not
what
I
expected.
It
was
nearby
machine
gun
fire.

Groggily,
I
rubbed
my
eyes,
and
wondered
if
I
was
still
dreaming.
We
were
a
long
way
from
the
front.
Could
the
Russian
army
have
pushed
through
hundreds
of
kilometers
overnight?
Lviv
was
well
within
range
for
bombardment
from
the
air,
but
in
my
exhausted
state
I
couldn’t
puzzle
out
what
there
would
have
been
to
shoot
at
with
machine
guns
during
an
air
attack.

Shorty
after
the
automatic
weapons
rattled
to
life,
periodic
explosions
started
sounding
in
every
direction.
Later,

my
cousin
Evan
would
explain
to
me
how
Ukrainian
forces
had
figured
out
a
number
of
ways
to
more
inexpensively
dispatch
a
cheap
Iranian-designed
Shahed
drone
than
to
hit
it
with
a
multimillion-dollar
Patriot
missile.
That
explained
the
gunfire.

When
Russia
first
invaded
Ukraine,
almost
all
of
the
so-called
experts
predicted
the
much-smaller
country
would
fall
within
days.
More
than
four
years
later,
Ukraine
is
still
holding
its
own.
The
Ukrainians
proved
far
more
resourceful
than
almost
anyone
gave
them
credit
for.

Ukraine
has
received
a
great

deal
of
financial
and
material
assistance
from
the
United
States
and
other
allies.
This
is
not
a
giveaway,
but
a
tremendous
investment
that
has

already
paid
dividends
for
America.
This
investment
will
continue
to
pay
off
handsomely
well
into
the
future.

To
their
great
credit,
while
still
facing
their
own
dire
threats,
Ukrainians
have
offered
to
share
the
technology
they
have
developed
and
the
talent
they
have
curated
over
nearly
half
a
decade
of
war
to
help
their
friends
abroad.
Ukraine’s
military

has
already
sent
teams
of
experts
armed
with
the
latest
in
inexpensive
defensive
technology
to
assist
Gulf
nations
in
protecting
themselves
from
Iran’s
clouds
of
Shahed
drones.

“We
are
ready
to
help
those
who
help
us,”
said
Ukraine’s
president
Volodymyr
Zelensky.

Yet,
because
the
United
States
of
America
is
run
by
a
79-year-old
toddler,
the
country
that
needlessly
started
this
war
in
Iran
has
rejected
Zelensky’s
attempt
to
help
the
U.S.
defend
its
troops
more
easily
and
efficiently.
Going
back
on
his
promise
of
just
a
week
prior
to
take
help
in
Iran
from
“any
country”
willing
to
provide
it,
President
Donald
Trump

most
recently
said
the
“last
person
we
need
help
from
is
Zelensky.”
The
American
president
made
these
comments
as
part
of
an
unhinged
rant
about
how
he
still
wishes
to
hand
over
large
swathes
of
Ukraine
to
Russian
dictator
Vladimir
Putin.

The
United
States
military
is
spending,
at
a
minimum,

a
billion
dollars
a
day
on
this
war
in
Iran.
That
does
not
account
for
the
knock-on
effects
of
the
war
on
the
global
economy.
In
some
instances,
the
financial
bloodletting
includes
igniting
a
U.S.
Patriot
missile

that
can
cost
the
U.S.
Army
as
much
as
$4
million,
or
a
THAAD
interceptor
that
costs
more
like
$15.5
million,
to
destroy
a
Shahed
drone
produced
by
Iran
for
as
little
as
$20,000.

Meanwhile,
the
national
debt

sits
at
a
record-high
$39
trillion.
With
Trump’s
policy
portfolio
undeniably
set
to
keep
the
U.S.
budget
deficit
growing
indefinitely,
it
appears
our
national
leadership
has
no
interest
in
addressing
America’s
spending
decadence
anytime
soon.

Our
president
is
wasting
billions
he
doesn’t
have
to
fight
a
war
he
didn’t
have
to
fight.
Rejecting
help
now
from
a
proven
friend
to
not
only
rein
in
costs
but
to
better
protect
American
lives
is
compounding
recklessness
with
insanity.

Ukraine
has
proven
itself
a
true
friend
to
the
United
States.
For
Trump
to
sneer
at
its
generous
offer
of
needed
military
assistance
only
demonstrates
his
inability
to
meaningfully
engage
in
a
genuine
friendship.
It
is
a
tragedy
that
the
American
taxpayer
will
continue
to
lose
billions,
and
that
the
American
military
will
continue
to
sacrifice
lives,
to
pay
for
Trump’s
petulance.

---

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].

In
a

letter
to
lawmakers
on
Monday,
employer
advocacy
groups
applauded
the
introduction
of
the
Healthy
Competition
for
Better
Care
Act,
a
bill
that
aims
to
increase
competition
in
healthcare.

The
letter
was
signed
by
the
American
Benefits
Council,
the
ERISA
Industry
Committee,
the
National
Alliance
of
Healthcare
Purchaser
Coalitions,
the
Purchaser
Business
Group
on
Health,
the
Silicon
Valley
Employers
Forum
and
the
Small
Business
Majority.

The
bill
was

introduced
in
the
Senate
last
week
by
Jon
Husted
(R-Ohio).
Reps.
Jodey
Arrington
(R-Texas),
Rick
Allen
(R-Georgia),
Donald
Davis
(D-North
Carolina)
and
Chuck
Edwards
(R-North
Carolina)
previously
introduced
a
companion
bill
in
the
House.

Specifically,
the
Healthy
Competition
for
Better
Care
Act
aims
to
improve
competition
in
healthcare
by
banning
several
types
of
anticompetitive
contracts
between
insurers
and
healthcare
providers.
It
would
prohibit
all-or-nothing
clauses
that
force
insurers
to
include
every
provider
in
their
network,
anti-steering
and
anti-tiering
clauses
that
limit
employers’
ability
to
direct
patients
to
lower-cost
or
higher-quality
providers,
most-favored-nation
clauses
that
require
insurers
to
receive
the
lowest
price
and
can
drive
prices
up
overall
and
gag
clauses
that
restrict
sharing
cost
information.

“The
cost
of
health
care
has
outpaced
inflation
for
more
than
two
decades.
That
is
a
staggering
fact
that
Americans
feel.
My
bill
creates
incentives
for
real
competition
in
health
care
to
drive
down
costs
for
patients,”
Husted
said
in
a
statement.

In
the
letter,
which
was
addressed
to
the
lawmakers
who
introduced
the
bills,
the
employer
groups
stated
that
employers
have
been
concerned
about
the
rapid
consolidation
of
health
systems
for
some
time.

“Across
the
country,
provider
systems
are
using
their
dominant
positions
to
impose
restrictive
and
often
unfair
contractual
terms
that
limit
network
flexibility,
reduce
access
to
high-value
providers,
and
drive
up
costs
without
improving
quality,”
the
organizations
stated
in
the
letter.
“These
trends
undermine
employers’
ability
to
design
benefit
plans
that
prioritize
value,
support
innovation,
and
deliver
high-quality
care.

“Your
bill
meaningfully
addresses
these
issues
by
supporting
incentives
for
patients
who
choose
high-quality,
lower-cost
providers;
allowing
employers
and
insurers
to
contract
with
hospitals
and
providers
without
being
required
to
enter
additional
agreements
with
affiliated
systems;
and
permitting
health
insurance
issuers
to
negotiate
their
own
rates
with
providers
who
are
not
parties
to
a
specific
contract,”
the
organizations
continued.

They
added
that
the
provisions
would
bring
more
balance
to
healthcare
markets,
increase
transparency
and
improve
access
to
high-value
care.

Photo:
MikeyLPT,
Getty
Images

*
Chief
Justice
Roberts
says
personal
attacks
against
judges
have
got
to
stop.
But,
one
might
ask,
what
if
those
attacks
are
official
acts
of
the
president?
[Reuters]

*
Jurors
must
ponder
whether
Elon
Musk
was
deliberate
or
stupid.
[Law360]

*
The
Senate
Commerce
Committee
asks
“Liability
or
Deniability?”
as
Section
230
turns
30.
A
milestone
birthday
that,
like
most
30th
birthdays,
will
be
celebrated
with
existential
dread
and
questioning
whether
it
should
even
still
exist.
[Senate
Commerce
Committee]

*
Weil
finds
its
new
leader.
[American
Lawyer]

*
Donald
Trump
wants
election
tamperer
Tina
Peters
out
of
prison
with
his
“full
pardon”
of
exclusively
state
crimes,
but
after
scuffling
with
fellow
inmate,
Peters
has
new
legal
trouble.
[Denver
Post]

*
SEC
announces
guidelines
for
cryptocurrency
clearing
the
way
for
fake
money
Ponzi
schemes.
[Coindesk]

*
Trump
administration
files
its
defense
of
the
Pentagon’s
supply
chain
risk
designation
for
Anthropic
arguing
that
Anthropic
presents
an
incurable
threat
to
the
United
States…
that
the
government
needs
to
use
for
its
most
sensitive
applications

immediately.
[US
News]

Reed
Smith
Opens
A
New
Office
And
Grabs
Talent
From
Other
Firms:
Yoink!
Yoink!
VanDyke
Supporters
Are
Cracking
Out
Philosophy
To
Defend
Him:
Much
easier
to
call
the
guy
dumb
and
move
on.
Read
This
Before
That
Law
Review
Submission:
Taking
legal
scholarship
seriously
is
a
step-by-step
process.
Did
You
Catch
Trump’s
Supreme
Court
Meltdown?:
This
Truth
Social
rant
makes
you
wonder
if
he
needs
to
do
another
round
of
testing.
Amazing
Name,
Even
Better
Service:
RealityCheck
catches
AI
hallucinations
in
legal
briefs!
Judge
Kaplan
Is
On
Karen
Duty:
Did
SBF’s
mom
leave
a
voicemail
for
the
judge?
No
Experience?
No
Problem!:
DOJ
drops
experience
requirements
to
keep
the
dumpster
fire
going.

Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature

Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!

Which
state’s
Committee
of
Bar
Examiners
is
considering
adding
AI
classes
to
its
required
practice-based
competency
courses?

Hint:
If
adopted,
it
would
include
use,
capabilities,
and
limitations
of
AI.

See the
answer
on
the
next
page.