Category: Lawyering

Courts, Lawyering

Hope and a Prayer: Liberals Condemn the Conservative Justices After Dubious Rolling Stone Article

There was an extraordinary story this week out of Rolling Stone magazine, which breathlessly reported a “serious matter” of an allegation that Supreme Court justices prayed with evangelicals, including some associated with groups that filed amicus briefs with the Court. Many liberal sites went immediately into instant vapors at the thought of justices praying with such individuals, including the usual unhinged claims of ethical violations and renewed calls for everything from court packing to impeachments. What is clear is that the critics will require more than this “hope and a prayer” to achieve such ends. Continue reading “Hope and a Prayer: Liberals Condemn the Conservative Justices After Dubious Rolling Stone Article” →

Constitutional Law, Lawyering, Politics

“Star Chamber Comeback”: Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel Loses Flint Water Cases in Spectacular Fashion

Attorney General Dana Nessel has lost the Flint case in spectacular fashion this week. Over six years ago, I wrote earlier about misgivings over the prosecutions but Nessel’s office created new challenges for the prosecution. In an unanimous 6-0 ruling, the Michigan Supreme Court held that her office committed a fatal and inexplicable error in prosecuting nine officials for the Flint water crisis, including former Gov. Rick Snyder. The court ruled that prosecutors doomed the case when they decided to bypass the conventional grand jury system in favor of a single judge to indict the officials. Now the cases have been tossed out. Continue reading ““Star Chamber Comeback”: Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel Loses Flint Water Cases in Spectacular Fashion” →

Constitutional Law, Lawyering, Politics

“The First Thing We Do”: Liberals Push Two Leading Lawyers Out of Major Firm After Winning Second Amendment Case

As previously discussed, there has been a campaign from the left to pressure firms to force out Republican lawyers or to drop conservative clients (with the support of lawyers and legal commentators). Now, after former Solicitor General Paul Clement and his colleague Erin Murphy won one of the most significant constitutional victories in history, Kirkland & Ellis has yielded to the mob and forced them out of the firm. It seems that, if you want to take a Second Amendment case, you should have the decency of losing. In a column in the Wall Street Journal, the lawyers recount how they were shown the door after objections from lawyers in the firm and clients. The left appears to be channeling the views of Dick the Butcher in Shakespeare’s Henry VI that “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” Continue reading ““The First Thing We Do”: Liberals Push Two Leading Lawyers Out of Major Firm After Winning Second Amendment Case” →

Constitutional Law, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Supreme Court

The Dobbs Decision Unleashes Rage and Revisionism

In the aftermath of the historic ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, politicians and pundits have denounced the Supreme Court justices and the Court itself for holding opposing views on the interpretation of the Court. Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the justices “right-wing politicians” and many journalists called the Court “activists.” Most concerning were legal analysts who fueled misleading accounts of the opinion or the record of this Court. Notably, it is precisely what the Court anticipated in condemning those who would make arguments “designed to stoke unfounded fear.” Continue reading “The Dobbs Decision Unleashes Rage and Revisionism” →

Congress, Constitutional Law, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Supreme Court

Democratic Member Calls for Justice Thomas to Resign Over Wife’s Activism

Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) has joined the call for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to resign due to the communications of his wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, with lawyer John Eastman supporting the certification challenge. It is still unclear what that email contains, but Ginni Thomas was a vocal supporter for former President Donald Trump in both public and private. Pascrell called Thomas “a corrupt jurist” and said that he could not be considered “neutral” given the fact that his wife is a political activist. Pascrell’s demand comes after Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse called for an investigation into the matter. The demand is entirely without legal or ethical merit absent new evidence that Justice Thomas himself engaged in political advocacy while ruling on related cases. Continue reading “Democratic Member Calls for Justice Thomas to Resign Over Wife’s Activism” →

Bizarre, Lawyering

Controversial Clinton Lawyer Marc Elias Slams ‘Team Normal” for Supporting Lies
(MSNBC/via YouTube)

The hearings of the House Select Committee on the Jan. 6th riot have featured a number of Republican lawyers, including former Attorney General Bill Barr, who opposed efforts to challenge the election after finding no support for the widespread election fraud claims of former President Donald Trump. The media called them “Team Normal.” That does not sit well with the most rabid activists who spent years demonizing Barr and others. Yet, the most ironic dissenting voice is that of former Clinton campaign General Counsel Marc Elias, who just ran a vehement column “Calling B.S. On Trump’s ‘Team Normal.'” Elias is a lawyer previously sanctioned in court and accused of lying about the hidden funding of the Steele Dossier by the Clinton campaign.

Continue reading “Controversial Clinton Lawyer Marc Elias Slams ‘Team Normal” for Supporting Lies” →

Constitutional Law, Courts, Criminal law, Lawyering

Ohio Supreme Court Overturns Sentence Adding Six Years After Defendant Called Judge “Racist as F**k”

There is an interesting case out of Ohio where the state Supreme Court has ruled that Lake County Common Pleas Court Judge Eugene Lucci erred when he gave Manson Bryant, 35, an added six years after Bryant called him “racist as f**k.” The outburst followed his initial sentencing for robbery, kidnapping, and weapons charges relating to an armed burglary.

Continue reading “Ohio Supreme Court Overturns Sentence Adding Six Years After Defendant Called Judge “Racist as F**k”” →

Academia, Constitutional Law, Free Speech, Lawyering

Shapiro Resigns From Georgetown After the Law School Reinstates Him on a “Technicality”

Last week, many of us initially celebrated the reinstatement of the Center for the Constitution Director Ilya Shapiro as a belated but important victory for free speech and academic freedom. Then we all read the rationale from Law Dean William Treanor, who adopted a technicality that not only avoided a full endorsement of Shapiro’s rights but left a menacing uncertainty as to his (and any other conservative’s) future protections at Georgetown University Law School.  Shapiro has elected to leave Georgetown to take a position with the Manhattan Institute given the lack of support for his right to speak freely at the law school. Unfortunately, most schools want to avoid litigation (and the controversy) over terminating dissenting faculty. The preference is to make life on faculties so hostile or intolerable that faculty will simply resign.

Continue reading “Shapiro Resigns From Georgetown After the Law School Reinstates Him on a “Technicality”” →

Columns, Congress, Criminal law, Justice, Lawyering, Politics

Subpoena Wars: Washington is on a Path to Mutually Assured Destruction

Below is my column in The Hill on the subpoena war raging in Washington as the Jan. 6th Committee prepares for its first public hearings this week. This weekend, the Justice Department announced that it would not be prosecuting former chief of staff Mark Meadows and social media director Dan Scavino. As noted below, they took a wiser course of limited cooperation. The refusal to prosecute triggered a backlash from Rep. Adam Schiff who wanted to see more criminal charges out of the Biden Administration.

Here is the column: Continue reading “Subpoena Wars: Washington is on a Path to Mutually Assured Destruction” →

Criminal law, Lawyering

New York Attorneys Accused of Firebombing Police Car Given Generous Plea Deal

We previously discussed the cases of attorneys Colinford Mattis and Urooj Rahman, who were accused of throwing a Molotov cocktail into a police vehicle in New York. They were facing domestic terrorism charges and the possibility of 30 years in jail. This week, the Biden Administration agreed to a massive reduction of the charges in a plea agreement that will likely result only in a couple years of jail time. What is particularly bizarre is that the plea agreement reduces an earlier plea agreement for a more serious offense.

Continue reading “New York Attorneys Accused of Firebombing Police Car Given Generous Plea Deal” →

Free Speech, Lawyering, Politics, Society

The Depp Trial and the Demise of the ACLU: How a Celebrity Trial Exposed the Collapse of a Once Celebrated Group

In yesterday’s massive defamation award to actor Johnny Depp, his ex-wife Amber Heard was left holding a bill for $15,000,000. Even after a reduction for her own award and a statutory reduction of the punitive damage portion, Heard is still looking at $8,350,000 in damages. Many view that amount (which is $1.35 million more than her divorce settlement) to be justified in light of the damage caused to Depp’s reputation and career. However, the stain of  this verdict should be shared with others, even if they avoided the sting of actual damages. That includes many in the media (including the Washington Post staff) who rushed to paint Heard as a victim and Depp as an abuser. Yet, the greatest condemnation should be reserved for the organization that not only pushed that narrative but actually helped draft the defamatory column: the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Continue reading “The Depp Trial and the Demise of the ACLU: How a Celebrity Trial Exposed the Collapse of a Once Celebrated Group” →

Lawyering, Torts

Depp-Heard Verdict Contains Relatively Rare Defamation-by-Counsel Liability
YouTube screengrab

The massive verdict in favor of actor Johnny Depp yesterday constitutes a rare victory of a public figure under the difficult New York Times v. Sullivan standard for defamation. The award of $15 million found that Amber Heard not only lied but did so with malice. Depp ran the table on all of his counts. While this case will likely be studied for years, the one verdict in favor of Heard is itself notable because it was based on defamation by counsel — a lesson for lawyers in defending their clients in public.

Continue reading “Depp-Heard Verdict Contains Relatively Rare Defamation-by-Counsel Liability” →

Courts, Lawyering, Media, Politics

Sussmann Juror: “There are Bigger Things … Than a Possible Lie to the FBI”

The acquittal of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann has been the subject of furious debate among politicians and pundits. Some have argued that the case collapsed from lack of evidence while others have alleged that prosecutors faced as biased judge and jury. For his part, Sussmann claimed that the jury found that “I told the truth.”  The truth is more complex and few would assume that the verdict was based on Sussmann’s veracity. However, a statement from a juror immediately after the verdict fueled speculation of the impact of juror bias. According to the Washington Times’ Jeff Mordock, the juror reportedly said “I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.” If that statement had been made during voir dire, it is likely that the juror would have been challenged.

Continue reading “Sussmann Juror: “There are Bigger Things … Than a Possible Lie to the FBI”” →

Columns, Criminal law, Lawyering, Media, Politics

Friends with Benefits: Sussmann Trial Further Exposes the FBI and Washington Establishment

Below is a slightly expanded version of my column in the Hill on Sussmann trial and what it revealed about the role of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the combined Russian collusion investigations. It also looks down the road at whether Special Counsel John Durham will be allowed to write the same type of public report that concluded the Mueller investigation.

Here is the column: Continue reading “Friends with Benefits: Sussmann Trial Further Exposes the FBI and Washington Establishment” →

Columns, Criminal law, Lawyering, Media, Politics

How the Sussmann Trial Inadvertently Revealed the Role of Clinton in the Alfa Bank Scandal

Below is an expanded version of my column in The Hill on the implication of Hillary Clinton in false Alfa Bank claims of Russian collusion. While most media ignored the testimony of Clinton’s former campaign manager in the Sussmann trial, it adds to a damning record on how the Clinton campaign was behind arguably the most successful disinformation campaign in American political history with both the Steele dossier and the Alfa bank claims. Ironically, despite Sussmann efforts to conceal his connections to Clinton in the FBI meeting, it was his counsel who effectively outed Clinton in the scandal. Former Clinton Campaign manager Robby Mook then violated the Eleventh Commandment of Democrats: Thou shalt not name a Clinton in a scandal.

Here is the column:

Continue reading “How the Sussmann Trial Inadvertently Revealed the Role of Clinton in the Alfa Bank Scandal” →

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks