Podcasts about American Bar Association

Today's Headlines: It was quite a weekend! Trump turned DC streets into a 1.7-mile IndyCar speedway for another Freedom 250 event, took a ceremonial lap in the presidential limo with Melania — not Natalie — while his Qatari plane did a flyover. In other shady news, Trump announced he's importing up to 300,000 metric tons of "product for ground beef" without specifying what the product is, where it's from, or how it'll be discounted 25% — which landed one day after a New York Times investigation revealed the Bureau of Land Management has been selling wild horses to buyers who ship them to slaughter plants through a legal loophole, with sales more than doubling in 2025. On the tariff beat, The trade war with Canada is officially back on with 50% tariffs on $20 billion in goods, Canadian PM Mark Carney promising to match them dollar for dollar starting September 8th, and Carney publicly stating that Trump is demanding Canada change its French language and Quebec culture as conditions for reversing tariffs. We finally have a nominee to lead the FDA, Trump nominated Dr. Heidi Overton and she has an MD and a PhD, which is more than expected. She has also called for conservatives to "infiltrate" public health institutions though, which is less reassuring given that 2026 has already seen four times the average number of foodborne illness cases. The Department of Education took the first steps to strip the American Bar Association of its law school accreditation authority, which would prevent graduates of non-accredited schools from sitting the bar exam in most states — a creative way to destabilize the entire legal profession. Back to shady, Jared Kushner quietly met with Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries to discuss working together on housing and cost of living, which suggests the White House privately expects Democrats to win the House majority in November. And finally, a wildfire near Reno has burned over 13,000 acres with zero containment, putting 42,000 people under evacuation orders including two hospitals, with 40 additional fires burning across Nevada simultaneously. Resources/Articles mentioned:  CNN: Freedom 250 IndyCar race in Washington, DC, and other Trump administration news CNN: Trump defends pause on beef tariffs amid criticism from US cattle producers Variety: Taylor Sheridan Accused of Stealing ‘Yellowstone' From 2016 Pitch in Copyright Lawsuit NYT: Under Trump, Protected Wild Horses Are Going to Slaughter Time: Who Is Heidi Overton, Trump's Nominee to Lead the FDA? AP News: What to know about Trump's 50% tariffs on Canadian goods that just went into effect WSJ: Trump Administration Attacks Bar Association's Power to Accredit Law Schools AP News: Jared Kushner meets with Democratic leader Jeffries with House control at stake in November NYT: Fire Near Reno, Nev., Prompts Evacuations of Homes and Hospitals Subscribe to the Betches News Room and join the Morning Announcements group chat. Go to: betchesnews.substack.com Morning Announcements is produced by Sami Sage and edited by Grace Hernandez-Johnson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A masterclass on leadership, legacy, and succession. With Ron Solish (CEO) and Steve Sallen (CFO) of Maddin Hauser. --- STEVEN ("STEVE") D. SALLEN joined Maddin Hauser as a law clerk in 1983. He served as the firm's president and CEO for fifteen years and is currently the CFO. Steve earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan and his law degree, cum laude, from the University of Detroit School of Law. There he served as Case and Comment Editor of the University of Detroit Law Review. Steve concentrates his practice in the areas of real estate law, environmental law, and corporate law. His clients include some of Michigan's most successful manufacturing firms, real estate developers, general contractors, and commercial real estate brokers. He also heads the firm's Environmental Law group and is co-chair of the Real Estate group. Read more about Steve Sallen --- RONALD (RON) A. SOLLISH, shareholder, is the firm president and CEO, and chairman of the Corporate and Employment practice groups. He specializes in employment, real estate, partnership, finance, corporate, and business law. A frequent speaker on legal topics, Ron has addressed such groups as the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, the Michigan Association of Certified Public Accountants, and American Society for Industrial Security. Ron is licensed to practice law in Michigan and is a member of the American Bar Association, State Bar of Michigan, and Oakland County Bar Association. Read more about Ron Sollish   Connect with Jon Dwoskin: Twitter: @jdwoskin Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jonathan.dwoskin Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thejondwoskinexperience/ Website: https://jondwoskin.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jondwoskin/ Email: jon@jondwoskin.com Get Jon's Book: The Think Big Movement: Grow your business big. Very Big! Connect with Steve Sallen and Ron Sollish: Steve Sallen: https://www.maddinhauser.com/people/steven-d-sallen  Ron Sollish: https://www.maddinhauser.com/people/ronald-a-sollish  Maddin Hauser: https://www.maddinhauser.com  Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MaddinHauser  Twitter: https://twitter.com/MaddinHauserPC  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/maddin-hauser-roth-and-heller-pc  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@maddinhauserlaw  *E - explicit language may be used in this podcast.

A.M. Edition for Aug. 21. WSJ's Alex Frangos explains the combination of factors that fueled a multi-day bond selloff and what to watch for in the weeks to come. Plus, the Trump administration targets the Bar Association's ability to accredit law schools. And James Rundle from the Dow Jones Risk Journal podcast looks at a White House initiative that could see private companies join the fight against foreign criminal groups. Luke Vargas hosts. Sign up for the WSJ's free What's News newsletter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Supreme Court allows above-ground construction of President Donald Trump's White House ballroom to continue while the Justices consider legal challenges to the project; Vice President JD Vance returns to his hometown in Ohio to speak at the steel mill where his grandfather worked, promote the economic agenda of the Trump-Vance Administration, and support Republican candidates for office in Ohio; President Trump will rally tonight in South Carolina for Sen. Darline Graham, who faces a Senate Republican primary runoff next Tuesday against Rep. Ralph Norman; House Speaker Mike Johnson campaigns in New York's 3rd Congressional district for the Republican challenging the Democratic incumbent, his latest stop in a nationwide tour of battleground U.S. House districts likely to decide which party controls the House after election day; Education Department recommends the American Bar Association no longer be authorized by the federal government to accredit law schools, something it has done since 1952, accusing the group of having a liberal bias. We will talk about it with The Hill's Legal Affairs Editor Zach Schoenfeld (46); The Space Force general overseeing the Golden Dome project to protect the U.S. homeland from missiles and other airborne threats, gives an update on the technology tests so far. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We've launched Minimum Competence CLE, and our first course is now available completely free. Researching Federal Tax Issues After Loper Brightlooks at how the Supreme Court's decision ending Chevron deference changes the way lawyers should research and evaluate Treasury regulations, IRS guidance, and other federal tax authorities.Take the course and earn CLE credit at cle.minimumcomp.com.This Day in Legal History: The American Bar Association Is FoundedOn August 21, 1878, seventy-five lawyers from twenty-one states gathered in Saratoga Springs, New York, and founded the American Bar Association. The stated mission had all the ambition—and word count—you would expect from a nineteenth-century professional organization: “the advancement of the science of jurisprudence, the promotion of the administration of justice, and a uniformity of legislation throughout the country.”James Overton Broadhead, a Missouri lawyer, became the ABA's first president. And the idea apparently had some appeal. Within a year, the organization had grown from its original 75 members to nearly 300.It is worth remembering just how different the legal profession looked at the time. There were few meaningful licensing standards, legal education varied enormously from one place to another, and there was nothing resembling a national voice for lawyers. “The bar,” such as it was, was largely a collection of state and local institutions operating under their own rules and traditions.The ABA helped change that.Over the next century, it became one of the principal forces behind the professionalization of American law. It developed model ethics standards, eventually producing what became the Model Rules of Professional Conduct that form the basis for lawyer regulation in most states. It became enormously influential in law-school accreditation. And for decades, its assessments of federal judicial nominees carried substantial weight in Washington.In other words, the ABA became something close to an institutional center of gravity for a profession that, by design, does not really have one. Whether that has always been a good thing is a separate question—and there is certainly no shortage of lawyers willing to debate it.But the date is particularly interesting this year because the ABA is once again squarely in the headlines.Just this week, we covered the organization's lawsuit challenging the administration's executive orders targeting major law firms. The ABA's argument, at bottom, is that the government is attempting to use its power to punish lawyers and firms for representing clients or causes the administration dislikes—and, in doing so, pressure the broader legal profession into falling in line.There is a rather striking symmetry to it.An organization founded nearly 150 years ago in part to promote “the administration of justice” now finds itself in court arguing that the independence of the lawyers responsible for administering that system is itself under threat.One can agree or disagree with the ABA's politics—and plenty of people do. But the principle underlying its founding is harder to dismiss. A legal profession capable of governing itself, enforcing its own standards, and, when necessary, telling political power “no” is not merely a professional convenience. It is part of the architecture of the rule of law.Of course, independence is only valuable if lawyers actually use it. Which brings us neatly back to today's opening quote from Charles Hamilton Houston: what lawyers choose to do with the power and independence their profession gives them matters enormously.Nearly 150 years after those 75 lawyers met in Saratoga Springs, that question has hardly become less relevant.Another key test case in the massive social-media litigation has evaporated: a New Jersey teenager has voluntarily dropped her lawsuit against Meta, Google, and Snap, just weeks before it was set for trial in October. The 15-year-old, identified in court records only by her initials, had alleged that the companies' platforms fueled addiction, depression, and self-harm. Notably, her lawyer said she received no payment to walk away—she simply wanted, in the attorney's words, to “resume her life.” TikTok had earlier settled her claims separately. If you've been following along, this should sound familiar: back in July, we covered a different teen plaintiff, in a bellwether case against Meta, dropping his claims days before trial. Now it's happened again. Here's why it matters strategically. These are “bellwether” cases—representative individual lawsuits, plucked from a pool of thousands, tried first so both sides can gauge how juries will react and calibrate settlement value. When a marquee bellwether disappears right before trial, it removes a data point everyone was watching. And the reason this one vanished is worth sitting with: not a secret settlement, but a teenager deciding she didn't want to spend her life as the face of a landmark lawsuit, subjected to discovery into her mental health and cross-examination about her worst moments. The significance is a quiet illustration of a real tension in mass litigation—the individual plaintiffs who anchor these cases are often young and vulnerable, and the litigation itself exacts a toll that can lead them to walk away. Meanwhile, the states' cases, like the 29-state trial underway in California, march on without that problem, because a state attorney general doesn't have a childhood to protect. US teen drops lawsuit against Meta, Google, Snap ahead of trial | ReutersBenzinga · WJLAThe Justice Department is seeking to question the FBI officials who carried out the 2022 search of Mar-a-Lago—a striking move that turns the machinery of investigation around to point at the investigators. According to sources, the requests are coming from a team working under Joe diGenova, a Trump ally now overseeing a Florida-based probe, and the investigation is reportedly built on the theory that Trump was the victim of a criminal conspiracy against his rights. Let's recall the facts, because they matter. The 2022 search was authorized by a federal judge and turned up more than 100 classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, including highly sensitive national-security records. That led to charges against Trump and two associates for retaining classified material and obstruction. The case never reached a jury on the merits—it was dismissed after a judge concluded the special counsel, Jack Smith, had been unlawfully appointed, and the DOJ dropped its appeal after Trump won the 2024 election. So here's the inversion: agents who executed a lawful, court-approved search warrant, and found exactly the classified documents the warrant anticipated, are now themselves the subjects of scrutiny, under a theory that pursuing Trump was itself a crime against him. The significance is about the independence of law enforcement and the chilling effect of retribution. When agents who followed a valid warrant can be investigated years later for having done so—by a team led by a political ally of the person they investigated—it sends a message to every FBI agent and prosecutor about the personal risk of investigating the powerful. It's the same thread we pulled on yesterday with the Comey prosecution: the concern that federal law-enforcement power is being turned to punish the president's perceived enemies rather than to pursue crime. DOJ seeks to question FBI officials tied to search of Trump Mar-a-Lago estate, sources say | ReutersWashington Post · Yahoo NewsAnd finally, a fight is heating up that will help define who owns the raw material of the AI era: your voice. In federal court in Illinois, a group of journalists, podcasters, voice actors, and audiobook narrators are suing a who's-who of tech—Apple, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, Samsung, Alphabet, Adobe, and the AI voice company ElevenLabs—alleging the companies harvested their “voiceprints” from publicly available audio recordings and used them to train commercial AI voice models without consent. This week, the two sides squared off over the companies' motions to dismiss. The legal engine here is a powerful Illinois statute called BIPA, the Biometric Information Privacy Act—the same law that produced a $650 million settlement from Facebook over face-tagging. BIPA treats biometric identifiers, including voiceprints, as something a company can't collect or use without informed consent, and it comes with statutory damages and a private right of action, which makes it a serious threat. The core dispute is about harm. The tech companies argue the plaintiffs can't point to any concrete injury—no cloned voice showed up in a product they can identify—so there's nothing to sue over. The plaintiffs counter that the harvesting itself is the harm: BIPA was designed to stop the nonconsensual capture of your biometric identity in the first place, whether or not it later surfaces in a product. The significance is that this is a preview of the defining legal question of AI training: the models are built on enormous quantities of human-created data—our voices, our writing, our faces—often scraped without asking, and the law is scrambling to decide whether that scraping is a harm in itself. Old privacy statutes like BIPA are becoming the sharpest tools plaintiffs have, and how these motions come out will shape whether the people whose voices train the machines have any say at all. Lawyers square off in fight over voice data used to train AI | ReutersMacDailyNews · Crypto Briefing This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

We've launched Minimum Competence CLE, and our first course is now available completely free. Researching Federal Tax Issues After Loper Bright looks at how the Supreme Court's decision ending Chevron deference changes the way lawyers should research and evaluate Treasury regulations, IRS guidance, and other federal tax authorities.Take the course and earn CLE credit at cle.minimumcomp.com.This Day in Legal History: The Salem Witch TrialsOn August 19, 1692, five people—George Burroughs, John Proctor, John Willard, Martha Carrier, and George Jacobs Sr.—were hanged at Salem, Massachusetts, convicted of witchcraft. It was one of the darkest days in a period that has become the enduring American shorthand for a legal system gone catastrophically wrong.What makes the Salem trials so instructive for lawyers is that they weren't lawless in form—they had judges, juries, indictments, and testimony. They failed on substance, and specifically on evidence. The courts admitted so-called “spectral evidence”: testimony from accusers that the defendant's ghostly apparition had tormented them, something no one else could see or disprove. It was, by its nature, impossible to rebut—the perfect engine for convicting the innocent. The case of George Burroughs, a Harvard-educated former minister, captures the horror of it. At the gallows, Burroughs recited the Lord's Prayer flawlessly—something a witch, according to popular belief, should have been incapable of doing. The crowd was shaken; it looked like proof of innocence. He was hanged anyway. When the evidence and the conclusion pointed in opposite directions, the conclusion won.The significance of August 19, 1692 is that it became a permanent cautionary tale baked into American law. Within months, prominent voices—including the minister Increase Mather, who gave us today's opening quote about the danger of condemning the innocent—turned against the use of spectral evidence, and the trials collapsed. In the centuries since, the reforms we associate with due process—rules of evidence, the presumption of innocence, the requirement of proof that can actually be tested and challenged—are in many ways a long answer to Salem. It's a fitting backdrop for a day when two of our stories turn on evidence: what an insider witness reveals under oath, and what a litigant is allowed to keep hidden. Salem is the reminder of what happens when a legal system stops caring whether its evidence is real.In the landmark trial where 29 states accuse Meta of designing its platforms to addict and harm children, jurors heard from a powerful first witness: Arturo Bejar, a former Facebook engineering director turned whistleblower. Bejar worked at the company for years, and he told the Oakland jury that internal culture put growth ahead of kids' safety—that “move fast and break things” was the mantra, that Meta took a “don't ask, don't tell” approach to whether children under 13 were on the platform, and that the company used the softer euphemism “problematic use” instead of “addiction” in a way that, he testified, undercounted the real harm. His central accusation is that Meta's leadership knew, from its own internal research, what its products were doing to young users—and chose not to act. There's a revealing legal sub-story here, too. Meta tried hard to keep Bejar off the stand, arguing he'd failed to preserve evidence because he deleted some Signal messages with former colleagues. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected that as a long-shot bid to eliminate a key witness. Meta, for its part, flatly denies the claims, insisting it never set out to hook children and has worked to make its platforms safer. The significance is that this is the evidentiary heart of the case: not abstract allegations about algorithms, but an insider describing, under oath, what he says the company knew and how it talked about it internally. It's the same pattern that broke open the tobacco cases—a witness from inside translating the company's own euphemisms back into plain English for a jury. Whether jurors believe him will shape one of the most consequential product cases in years. Former Meta engineer resumes testimony in landmark trial over social media's harm to young users | ReutersThe Globe and Mail · LPM / NPRA federal judge in Texas has declared the Biden-era “ghost gun” rule unconstitutional—a striking move, because the Supreme Court upheld that very rule just last year. Some background: ghost guns are firearms assembled from parts or kits that lack serial numbers, making them largely untraceable, and in 2022 the ATF issued a rule bringing those parts and kits under federal firearms regulation. Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth had originally struck the rule down as exceeding the agency's statutory authority—but in March 2025, the Supreme Court reversed him, holding the rule was a permissible reading of the Gun Control Act. Here's the maneuver worth understanding: the Supreme Court decided a statutory question—whether the agency had the power to issue the rule. It did not decide the constitutional questions. So O'Connor has now ruled again, this time on entirely different grounds, holding that the rule violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and is unconstitutionally vague under the Fifth Amendment's due process clause. In effect, when the statutory door closed, the challengers walked through the constitutional one, and the same judge let them in—blocking the rule as to certain products for Defense Distributed and members of the Second Amendment Foundation. Gun-control advocates called the decision “egregiously wrong” and predicted an appeal. But there's a genuine wrinkle: the Justice Department that would normally defend a Biden-era rule is now the Trump administration's DOJ, which is far more sympathetic to gun-rights arguments—so whether the government vigorously appeals its own rule's defeat is an open question. The significance is a vivid lesson in how litigation adapts: a Supreme Court win on statutory grounds does not necessarily end a fight if constitutional theories remain, and a determined judge can find a new path to the same result. Biden-era ‘ghost guns' restrictions are unconstitutional, US judge rules | ReutersUS News · Maryland Daily RecordThe Trump administration has invoked presidential privilege to keep secret the identities of the people who crafted its executive orders targeting major law firms. The context: last year the American Bar Association sued the White House and Justice Department over what it calls a “law firm intimidation policy”—a series of executive orders aimed at punishing firms for representing clients, causes, or positions the president dislikes, and, the ABA argues, coercing lawyers into dropping those clients. In discovery, the ABA wants to know who was behind the orders and whether officials specifically intended to discourage firms from taking on cases against the government. The administration's response is what's notable. It has formally invoked the presidential communications privilege—the same doctrine at the heart of the Nixon tapes case—but stretched it in an aggressive direction: the DOJ argues the privilege shields not just the substance of confidential advice, but the very identities of the people who gave it, whether or not they're executive-branch employees, and whether or not they're even lawyers. In other words, the government is claiming it can keep secret who wrote the orders. Here's the tension. The presidential communications privilege is real and important—presidents need candid advice—but it's qualified, not absolute; the Supreme Court in United States v. Nixon made clear it can yield to a sufficient showing of need. Extending it to conceal the mere identity of outside advisers, people who may not work for the government at all, is a notably broad claim. The significance is a double irony worth sitting with: these are executive orders designed to punish lawyers for their advocacy, and now the government is using one of the law's most powerful secrecy doctrines to hide who dreamed them up. Whether a court accepts that will say a lot about how far executive privilege can be stretched to shield the process behind a controversial policy. Trump invokes presidential privilege in lawsuit over law firm orders | ReutersAbove the Law · Law & CrimeAnd finally, in a piece I wrote for Forbes this week, I take up a question the president has apparently been chewing on: can the federal government stop New York's new pied-à-terre tax—the surcharge on second homes I've written about before? My short answer is that there's a federal solution, but it almost certainly isn't the one Trump wants, because he has almost nothing he can do on his own.Start with the executive branch. The president cannot simply nullify a state tax by executive order—that's not a power he has. The Justice Department could jump into the existing litigation or file its own federal challenge, but neither goes anywhere useful. The big obstacle is the Tax Injunction Act, a federal statute that keeps federal district courts out of the business of blocking state tax collection whenever taxpayers have an adequate remedy in their own state courts—which, here, they do. And when the DOJ once tried to get around that law by suing on behalf of homeowners over an allegedly discriminatory New York property-tax system, a federal court said no, you can't evade the Tax Injunction Act that way. So the executive route is basically a dead end; the administration can litigate, apply pressure, and post on Truth Social, but it can't make the tax disappear.Congress, though, has a real—if difficult—path, and this is where it gets genuinely interesting as a matter of federalism. Congress has more power over state taxation than the president does. It has limited state taxes before: a federal railroad law, for instance, bars certain discriminatory property taxes on railroads and even gives federal courts jurisdiction to enforce it despite the Tax Injunction Act. And in a case called Arizona Public Service v. Snead, the Supreme Court upheld a federal statute enacted specifically to preempt a New Mexico tax that Congress found discriminated against interstate commerce. So using its affirmative Commerce Clause power, Congress can prohibit state taxes it decides burden interstate commerce. But there are two catches I walk through. First, anti-commandeering: Congress can't order New York to repeal anything—it would have to regulate all states directly, invalidating a defined category of tax. Second, and harder, New York drafted this tax cleverly to dodge the obvious constitutional attack: it taxes based on use—whether a home is your primary residence—not based on whether you're an in-stater or an out-of-stater. A New Jerseyan's Manhattan apartment can be exempt if it's their primary home; a New Yorker's second home gets taxed. That use-not-residency design makes the usual discrimination claim much harder, and it means Congress would have to build a long, strained logical chain connecting a residence-neutral property tax to interstate commerce, then tailor a preemption statute to it and defend the whole contraption in court. So, yes, a federal fix is theoretically possible—but it runs entirely through Congress, and it's a heavy lift. Which is a lawyer's way of saying there's probably not much the administration can actually do. My bet is that Trump just stops posting about it.Trump Can't Stop New York's Pied-À-Terre Tax This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Round Table Group is a Premier Sponsor of the ABA Litigation Section. The selection of the Round Table Group as the subject of this interview should not be construed as an endorsement by the American Bar Association of the Round Table Group and its services. ----- Finding the right expert witness for your case can be a challenge. You want a witness who knows the topic, helps you ask the right questions, can handle a grilling from opposing counsel, and resonates with the judge and the jury. Guest Brice David is the senior manager of IP expert witness services at The Round Table Group, a pioneering firm in the field of expert witness referral services. Successful lawyers know the law, but that doesn't mean they understand highly complicated fields involving technology, patents, applications, even finance. That's what experts are for. When it comes to selecting a witness, there's a lot in play, from technical expertise to presentation style to availability to even something as simple as a regional accent or the wrong suit. Hear some real-world stories about what can go wrong (or right) when choosing an expert.  Plus, a quick tip from Lauren Williams on learning to slow down and enjoy the summer. Have a question, comment, or suggestion for an upcoming episode? Get in touch at MRogson@SkywardInsurance.com or JAReederJr@gmail.com. Resources Mentioned:  Round Table Group American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section

Discover how an employment lawyer built a seven-figure practice not by “working the room,” but by being radically authentic, hyper-generous, and unforgettable in her relationships. This episode breaks down how to turn clients, competitors, and even adversaries into your most loyal referral sources.   In this episode, Steve Fretzin and Randi Cohen discuss: Non-traditional path from prosecutor to employment law partner Forming and growing a boutique firm through partnership Authentic, curiosity-driven networking (not “working the room”) Turning clients, competitors, and adversaries into referral sources Overcoming imposter syndrome and trusting your own skills   Key Takeaways: Business development becomes much easier when you stop “networking” and instead focus on being genuinely curious about people's lives, needs, and goals. Long-term success often comes from leading with generosity—connecting others, sharing referrals, and helping even when there's nothing immediate in it for you. The most valuable relationships are built over time through repeated touchpoints, shared experiences, and small acts of follow-up and care. How you handle billing and money can either cement trust or destroy it; protecting relationships is far more valuable than squeezing every last 0.2 from a time entry. Confidence is often forged in scary, high-stakes cases—learning to push through imposter syndrome and rely on your preparation and judgment is a pivotal professional shift.   "My entire approach to networking is not to think of it as networking. It's just authenticity." —  Randi Cohen   Check out my new show, Be That Lawyer Coaches Corner, and get the strategies I use with my clients to win more business and love your career again.   Join the Be That Lawyer Community and connect with ambitious lawyers who are serious about growing their book of business, strengthening their brand, and becoming confident, consistent rainmakers.   Ready to go from good to GOAT in your legal marketing game? Don't miss PIMCON—where the brightest minds in professional services gather to share what really works. Lock in your spot now: https://www.pimcon.org/   Thank you to our Sponsor! LEX Reception: https://www.lexreception.com/partners/bethatlawyer Rankings.io: https://rankings.io/ Lawyer.com: https://www.lawyer.com/   Ready to grow your law practice without selling or chasing? Book your free 30-minute strategy session now—let's make this your breakout year: https://fretzin.com/   About Randi Cohen: Randi M. Cohen, Esq. is a labor and employment counselor and litigator at Kalmanson Cohen PLLC with nearly 20 years of experience representing individuals and businesses. Focused on practical, personalized problem-solving, she specializes in resolving workplace issues through strategic counseling and negotiation, while maintaining a formidable litigation practice in federal, state, and administrative tribunals across New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania when necessary. Widely sought after by small-to-medium businesses and individuals alike, Randi is an active author and member of the American Bar Association and the New York City Bar Association. Recognized as a New York Metro Super Lawyer, she holds a J.D., cum laude, from New York Law School and a B.A. from Muhlenberg College.   Connect with Randi Cohen:  Website: https://kalmansoncohen.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/randimcohen-employmentlawyer/   Connect with Steve Fretzin: LinkedIn: Steve Fretzin Twitter: @stevefretzin Instagram: @fretzinsteve Facebook: Fretzin, Inc. Website: Fretzin.com Email: Steve@Fretzin.com Book: Legal Business Development Isn't Rocket Science and more! YouTube: Steve Fretzin Call Steve directly at 847-602-6911   Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it. 

A mother lost her son on I-74 to a crash that never had to happen. The technology to prevent it already existed. The trucking company just didn't install it.In this episode of After the Crash, David Craig talks with Celeste Bowens-Martin, a professional bus driver with a CDL and someone he has represented over the years. In March of 2025, Celeste's oldest son, Isaiah, 35, was killed on I-74 while driving home to Indianapolis from Illinois. His car had crossed the median and come to a complete stop in the opposite lane of travel. A 2024 Freightliner struck him. That truck could have been equipped with crash avoidance technology, sensors, cameras, and active braking that detect a stationary object and stop the truck when a driver doesn't react. It wasn't. Celeste, who has relied on that same safety technology to avoid crashes in her own bus, joins David to explain why she is now committed to advocating for change.✔️ How collision avoidance and automatic emergency braking systems actually detect stationary vehicles✔️ Why a 2024 Freightliner may still leave the lot without crash avoidance technology installed✔️ The real cost of adding these systems: a few hundred to a few thousand dollars per truck✔️ How safety sensors can be unplugged or left off, and why inspections matter✔️ A professional CDL driver's firsthand account of technology saving her from crashes✔️ Why families deserve answers when a preventable crash takes someone they loveDavid Craig is one of the few attorneys in the U.S. who is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and accredited by the American Bar Association. That means he meets rigorous experience, ethics, and knowledge standards to hold trucking companies and unsafe drivers accountable. With 39+ years handling semi-truck wreck cases, David has seen how corporate decisions to cut costs on safety equipment can change families forever.This episode carries the weight of a grieving mother's loss. Celeste shares who Isaiah was, a gamer, a collector, her travel buddy, her day one, and how she is turning that grief into a mission so that no other family has to sit where she sits now.

Board-Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig breaks down one of the most dangerous places to be behind the wheel: a construction zone. Every summer, road work stretches across Indiana highways, and every year families lose loved ones in wrecks that never should have happened.In this episode of Ask David, David sits down with Ashley Napier, who oversees the litigation file managers at Craig, Kelley & Faultless and stays involved in cases directly. Together they dig into why construction zone truck wrecks are so much more complex than an ordinary car accident, what makes them so deadly, and how families can find answers after tragedy strikes. Ashley pulls real numbers straight from SemiCrashMap.com, and David explains a case they worked on together involving a truck driver who was killed while working underneath his broken-down truck.✔️ Why 2025 already saw 139 construction zone wrecks in Indiana, with 4 deaths and over 200 injured✔️ How SemiCrashMap.com shows where semi wrecks happen on I-70, I-65, and near Richmond and Wayne County✔️ Why most construction zone wrecks happen where lanes merge and traffic slows✔️ How speed, fatigue, distraction, and trucks on cruise control cause deadly rear-end crashes✔️ Who beyond the truck driver can be held accountable: brokers, shippers, contractors, and the state✔️ Why time limits and disappearing evidence make hiring the right attorney quickly so importantDavid Craig is one of the few attorneys in the U.S. who is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and accredited by the American Bar Association. That means he meets rigorous experience, ethics, and knowledge standards to hold trucking companies and unsafe drivers accountable. With more than 39 years handling semi-truck wreck cases, he has seen firsthand how a case treated like a simple car accident can leave families without the answers they deserve.One of the cases David and Ashley discuss stayed with them both. A driver whose truck broke down had to get underneath it in a construction zone. Another truck driver, impaired by drugs and traveling in the wrong lane, hit it and killed him. He left behind a wife and two children. Rather than accept the truck driver's minimum insurance, the team asked a harder question: why was there no safe place for him to pull off the highway?

Most families never stop to ask this question before hiring a lawyer: is the attorney still learning, or did they stop once they passed the bar?In this episode of Ask David, David Craig sits down with co-host Ashley Napier to break down why continuing education matters when you're choosing an attorney for a serious truck crash or wrongful death case. Law school teaches everyone how to think like a lawyer, but it doesn't teach anyone how to handle a semi-truck wreck. What separates a good trucking attorney from someone who just happens to take the case is what they've done in the years since. David Craig walks through his own path: from being one of the first lawyers in APITL (the first trucking-only plaintiff group in the country) to serving on the original Board of Regents of the Academy of Truck Accident Attorneys, the group that created the ABA-accredited board certification in truck accident law.✔️ Why law school never teaches you how to handle a specific type of case✔️ How continuing legal education rules got looser after COVID (and why that matters)✔️ The difference between a general practitioner and a specialized trucking lawyer✔️ How to research whether an attorney actually keeps learning before you hire them✔️ What CKF's "Winning Truck Wreck Cases" Indiana seminar covers, and who speaks✔️ Why investing in board-certified paralegals changes the outcome for clientsDavid Craig is one of the few attorneys in the U.S. who is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and accredited by the American Bar Association. He's one of only four board-certified truck accident attorneys in the entire state of Indiana, and he's spent 39+ years handling semi-truck and commercial vehicle wreck cases. That certification means he meets rigorous experience, ethics, and knowledge standards to hold trucking companies and unsafe drivers accountable.What stood out to David over the years was watching one of the best trial lawyers in the country, John Romano, sitting in the audience at conferences taking notes. If someone that experienced still shows up to learn, the message is clear: the best lawyers never stop.

 TrineDay socials & website Website/Store: https://www.trineday.com Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/trinedaypress Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/trinedaypress Twitter: https://x.com/TrineDay The Journey 193. Corruption 101: It's Everywhere In this Episode, Kris and Todd speak to John Loftus and Dan Luzadder in a continuing bi-weekly discussion about corruption. John Loftus is the author of America's Nazi Secret among several other books, and his new upcoming book My Client's Were Spies about his time as an attorney for sources in the Intelligence Community hoping to get more information about certain events in American history declassified, like he had done with the material on OPERATION PAPERCLIP in the 1980s, which produced an appearance on 60 Minutes in 1982 that was nominated for an Emmy award. America's Nazi Secret: https://trineday.com/products/americas-nazi-secret pre-order My Clients Were Spies: https://trineday.com/products/myclients-were-spies Dan Luzadder is an American journalist and author whose lengthy newspaper career began as a teenaged police reporter in the last days of linotypes. He came of age amid hagiographic newsroom characters who believed shoe leather reporting, tight deadlines and well-placed sources were journalism's divinity. He has written for the New York Daily News and the New York Times, shared a Pulitzer Prize (1983) for general local reporting, won a national public service award from the American Bar Association for exposing corruption in federal courts, and is a member of the Scripps Howard Journalism Hall of Fame. He resides with his wife, Nancy, in the Pacific Northwest. He is the author of The Manchurian Journalist: Lawrence Wright, the CIA and the Corruption of American Journalism. (Trine Day). He is currently at work on a book and investigative documentary series on a cold-case crime spree in Speedway, Indiana in 1978, and is completing a book exploring the American myth of Al Capone. The Manchurian Journalist: Lawrence Wright, the CIA, and the Corruption of American Journalism: https://trineday.com/products/manchurian-journalist-lawrence-wright-the-cia-and-the-corruption-of-american-journalism 

Mary and Andrew begin this week by addressing the Department of Justice dropping the subpoenas they ordered against New York Times journalists who reported on security concerns regarding President Trump's new Qatari-government-gifted Air Force One jet, noting that the attempt to subpoena the writers speaks to a failed effort of “chilling and intimidating” other reporters. But still, there were even more subpoenas: last week, the DOJ filed subpoenas for 14 major law firms as part of an ongoing lawsuit between the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Executive Office of the President, which Mary and Andrew believe is an effort by the government to try and “get the law firms to pressure the ABA to drop this lawsuit.” They also touch on an update to journalist Katie Phang's lawsuit against the federal government over Epstein files redactions and address Jack Smith's criminal referral by House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan. Plus, two immigration-related cases: a judge's decision to throw out a DOJ lawsuit challenging Minnesota immigration laws and an appeal court's decision to reverse a lower court decision releasing Pro-Palestinian activist Mohsen Mahdawi. A Note to Listeners: As the 2026 midterm elections heat up, MS NOW is headed to the Lone Star State. Join more than a dozen of your favorite hosts - including Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell, Jen Psaki, Michael Steele, Ali Velshi and more - in Arlington, Texas on September 26 for a day of community and conversation about the issues that matter most to you. Get your tickets at ms.now/together. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

-Rob celebrates the explosive growth of his podcast, jokes about becoming the "Rush Limbaugh Digital," and thanks longtime listeners for sticking with him through every twist, turn, and moving box. -Rob tears into reports of illegal voters on New Jersey's voter rolls, mocks officials blaming a "software glitch," and says the "there's no voter fraud" argument has officially gone extinct. -Rob cheers Rep. Brandon Gill's Capitol Hill grilling of the American Bar Association president, laughing as Gill repeatedly corners her over DEI, implicit bias, and race-based judicial selection while she struggles to answer simple questions. Today's podcast is sponsored by : RELIEF FACTOR - You don't need to live with aches & pains! Reduce muscle & joint inflammation and live a pain-free life by visiting http://ReliefFactor.com  GHOSTBED - I used to think a mattress was just furniture, until I got my GhostBed! GhostBed is offering my audience their lowest prices of the season, plus an extra 10% off. Go to http://GhostBed.com/CARSON and use promo code CARSON BIRCH GOLD - Protect and grow your retirement savings with gold. Text ROB to 98 98 98 for your FREE information kit! To call in and speak with Rob Carson live on the show, dial 1-800-922-6680 between the hours of 12 Noon and 3:00 pm Eastern Time Monday through Friday… Musical parodies provided by Jim Gossett (http://patreon.com/JimGossettComedy) You can now WATCH and chat with The Rob Carson Show LIVE on Newsmax's social media channels (Facebook, X/Twitter, YouTube, Rumble) Listen to Newsmax LIVE and see our entire podcast lineup at http://Newsmax.com/Listen Make the switch to NEWSMAX today! Get your 15 day free trial of NEWSMAX+ at http://NewsmaxPlus.com Looking for NEWSMAX caps, tees, mugs & more? Check out the Newsmax merchandise shop at : http://nws.mx/shop Follow NEWSMAX on Social Media:  -Facebook: http://nws.mx/FB  -X/Twitter: http://nws.mx/twitter -Instagram: http://nws.mx/IG -YouTube: https://youtube.com/NewsmaxTV -Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/NewsmaxTV -TRUTH Social: https://truthsocial.com/@NEWSMAX -GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/newsmax -Threads: http://threads.net/@NEWSMAX  -Telegram: http://t.me/newsmax  -BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/newsmax.com -Parler: http://app.parler.com/newsmax Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The institutions of the Smithsonian, the American Bar Association and more are compromised.  I play audio from both hearings.  Local “abolish ICE groups” continue to be retarded; and an example of possible K12 enrollment fraud to keep an eye out for before school begins.   Book Websites: HERE and HERE. https://www.moneytreepublishing.com/shop PROMO CODE: “AEFM” for 10% OFF, or https://armreg.co.uk PROMO CODE: "americaneducationfm" for 15% off all books and products. (I receive no kickbacks).  https://www.thriftbooks.com/ Q posts book: https://drive.proton.me/urls/JJ78RV1QP8#yCO0wENuJQPH

Aaron McIntire covers President Trump's campaign stop in Georgia, where he doubled down on branding the Democratic Party as communist and criticized Senate Republicans for stalling the SAVE America Act. He digs into a lopsided House vote in which 198 Democrats opposed a bill banning congressional stock trading, and a narrow NDAA vote where four House Republicans broke ranks on a transgender military service amendment. Aaron also covers the tragic St. Paul, Minnesota shooting in which Tsegaab Binessu allegedly killed three apartment leasing staff, Nansi Fuentes Zambrano, Dena Silcox, and Adam Wilwerding, in a rampage sparked by a parking contract dispute. He highlights Congressman Brandon Gill's pointed questioning of the American Bar Association's president about the organization's stance on implicit bias. Aaron closes out the week's poll results, where listeners overwhelmingly picked securing voter rolls as the administration's top midterm priority.

Josh opens the show by discussing growing concerns within the Left over the rise of socialism inside the Democratic Party. He examines what he sees as the party's takeover by its far-Left wing and explains why he believes enough is enough. Josh is then joined by Matthew Continetti of AEI's Domestic Policy Studies to discuss the latest developments involving Iran, including reports that President Trump is preparing for a major offensive against the regime. They also examine the bad actors on the right and the threat conspiracy theories pose to the conservative movement. Later, Josh breaks down a Capitol Hill hearing that highlighted what he says are longstanding biases within the American Bar Association and explains why he believes the ABA has accumulated too much influence. He also dives into the latest revelations surrounding the Democrats lawfare campaign, examining actions taken under Attorney General Merrick Garland during the Biden administration.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A blockbuster Thursday on The Marc Cox Morning Show — the New Jersey non-citizen voter roll scandal exploded into a full DOJ investigation, confirmed live by Fox News's Griff Jenkins after Governor Sherrill's software glitch excuse fell apart. Senator Josh Hawley finally joined the show after an eight-month wait, torching pardon attorney Liz Oyer over her death row clemency recommendations, backing filibuster reform for the Save America Act, and endorsing Missouri's Amendment 5 tax cut ahead of the August 4th vote. Jim Jordan and Brandon Gill exposed the American Bar Association's partisan double standard, former Senator Jim Talent broke down the path to reconciliation and America's broken Iran adversary, WNBA star Sophie Cunningham refused to back down defending women's sports, and Pastor Wes Martin dismantled the Jesus was a socialist myth while calling on churches to speak up for Amendment 3 and the unborn. A powerful pro-life story of a baby born at 22 weeks now thriving added real stakes to that fight. Local stories hit hard too — the Tower Grove homeless encampment lawsuit, SLU's DEI admissions probe, and Cori Bush's tornado fund investigation. Sports fans got Tom Ackerman on Joe Buck's Hall of Fame induction and the young Cardinals' playoff push, while Hunter Biden's tone-deaf Don Lemon interview closed things out with a laugh. Faith, family, and freedom — another morning of unapologetic conservative talk from The Marc Cox Morning Show. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #JoshHawley #NewJerseyVoterFraud #Amendment3 #Amendment4 #Amendment5 #SaveAmericaAct #WesMartin #JimTalent #SophieCunningham #GriffJenkins #TomAckerman #ConservativeTalk #STLRadio #FaithFamilyFreedom #MissouriVote #ProLife #TitleIX Full Guest List: Senator Josh Hawley Former Senator Jim Talent Griff Jenkins (Fox News) Tom Ackerman (KMOX Sports) Pastor Wes Martin (Grace Church)

Hour 4 of The Marc Cox Morning Show delivers the payoff listeners waited months for — Senator Josh Hawley goes off on pardon attorney Liz Oyer's clemency recommendations for death row killers, confirms his support for filibuster reform and Missouri's Amendment 5, and shuts down 2028 presidential speculation. Fox News's Griff Jenkins confirms a DOJ investigation into New Jersey's non-citizen voter rolls and defends ICE director Tom Homan against Democrat attacks. The hour also revisits the Mike Lee reconciliation update, the American Bar Association's partisan hearing exposure, and closes with Hunter Biden's tone-deaf defense of his own pardon on Don Lemon's show. A landmark hour of accountability journalism as Kim heads off on vacation. Faith, freedom, and common sense — The Marc Cox Morning Show delivers to the very end. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #JoshHawley #GriffJenkins #NewJersey #VoterFraud #TomHoman #HunterBiden #ConservativeTalk #STLRadio #FaithFamilyFreedom

Hour 1 of The Marc Cox Morning Show comes out swinging — Marc and Kim dig into New Jersey's stunning admission that 6,600 illegals landed on the voter rolls, dismantle the American Bar Association's claim of neutrality with help from Jim Jordan and Brandon Gill, break down GM and Ford's costly retreat from Biden's EV mandate, and sound the alarm on a poll showing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez leading the 2028 Democrat field. Marc makes his case for Missouri's Amendment 4 and 5 ahead of the August 4th vote, all while building anticipation for the hour's marquee guest: Senator Josh Hawley, live at 8:20. Faith, freedom, and the fight for the Constitution — this is only the beginning. Hashtags: #MarcCoxMorningShow #JoshHawley #VoterFraud #NewJersey #ABA #JimJordan #EVMandate #AOC2028 #Amendment4 #Amendment5 #ConservativeTalk #STLRadio #FaithFamilyFreedom

Guest Jim Pfaff, the Conservative Caucus, joins to discuss latest bills being passed out of the House of Representatives. Are they doing enough, and what will the Senate do in the next week? Discussion of lack of leadership in the Senate, Republicans playing the minority card, and the radicalism of the DSA.  House committee interviews the American Bar Association. Why would the ABA take a stand on political and social issues? Discussion of the DEI/ESG/and Woke ideology still lingering within institutions in society. How can we finally get rid of all of it? 

Fresh off his viral Smithsonian takedown, Congressman Brandon Gill turned his attention to the American Bar Association — grilling its president on the group's own diversity, equity, and inclusion language. Larry walks through Gill's relentless line of questioning: whether the ABA president will admit to her own "implicit biases," whether race and gender factored into Ketanji Brown Jackson's Supreme Court nomination, whether the Court should reflect America's racial makeup, why there's never been a transgender Supreme Court justice, and whether race should factor into law school admissions. She dodges nearly every question — and Gill never lets her off the hook.Become a Townhall VIP member with promo code "LARRY": https://townhall.com/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Martin Luther King famously said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." My guest today quoted his words in her 2024 book, Law Democratized: A Blueprint for Solving the Justice Crisis. But now, two years after that book's publication — at a moment when many see the rule of law under strain and speak openly of democratic backsliding — it is fair to ask: Are we still arcing toward justice? That is the question LawNext host Bob Ambrogi put to Renee Knake Jefferson at the start of today's conversation. Jefferson is a professor of law and the Joanne and Larry Doherty Chair in Legal Ethics at the University of Houston Law Center, and her work sits at the intersection of legal ethics, judicial ethics, lawyer regulation, legal education and access to justice. She is also the coauthor of the acclaimed book Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court, an elected member of the American Law Institute, and a former co-reporter for the ABA Commission on the Future of Legal Services. In 2013, the ABA Journal named her a Legal Rebel for co-founding the ReInvent Law Laboratory at Michigan State together with Daniel Martin Katz. More recently, she was elected to the American Bar Association's Council for the Section on Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, the body responsible for accrediting J.D. programs — so, as she puts it, she's gone from offering constructive criticism from the outside to working on the inside In her "spare time" (as if she possibly has any), she writes the Substack newsletter Legal Ethics Roundup, a weekly review of all things related to legal and judicial ethics. In today's conversation, Renee and Bob talk in depth about the access to justice crisis and what can be done to narrow the justice gap, including why the biggest barrier to legal help may be that people do not even recognize they have a legal problem. They also discuss the promise and peril of AI as a tool for closing the justice gap, why regulatory reform has not produced the domino effect many once predicted, and what lawyers, law schools, regulators and innovators can each do to move the needle.   Spoiler alert: Jefferson remains a glass-half-full optimist — and by the end of this conversation, you may be too.   Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out. Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Briefpoint, eliminating routine discovery response and request drafting tasks so you can focus on drafting what matters (or just make it home for dinner). CosmoLex, helping law firms manage their entire practice in one platform, from intake to payment. Try it free. Ajax, the AI timekeeper lawyers want to use.   If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

This Day in Legal History: The White House Tapes RevealedOn July 16, 1973, before the Senate Watergate Committee and a live national television audience, a former White House aide named Alexander Butterfield answered a question that changed American history. Asked whether there was any kind of recording system in the White House, Butterfield confirmed that President Nixon had installed a secret, voice-activated taping system that recorded his conversations and phone calls in the Oval Office and elsewhere. In a single answer, the entire Watergate investigation pivoted.Until that moment, the inquiry into the Watergate break-in and cover-up had largely been a contest of competing testimony—Nixon's word against that of his former counsel John Dean. The existence of the tapes meant there was now an objective record of what the President had actually said and known. Prosecutors and Congress immediately sought them; Nixon refused to hand them over, asserting executive privilege—the claim that a president's confidential communications are shielded from disclosure. That standoff produced one of the most important separation-of-powers decisions in American law.In United States v. Nixon, decided a year later in July 1974, a unanimous Supreme Court rejected the President's claim of absolute privilege. The Court recognized that executive privilege exists and has real constitutional footing, but held that it is not unqualified—that it must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a criminal proceeding. No person, the decision made clear, not even the president, is above the ordinary processes of the law. Nixon turned over the tapes, one of which captured him plotting to obstruct the investigation, and he resigned days later. The significance of July 16, 1973 is that a single truthful answer under oath set in motion the enforcement of a foundational principle: that presidential power operates within the law, and that the courts, not the president, decide the limits of privilege.Todd Blanche's bid to become attorney general is hanging in the balance after a tense confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Blanche, who has been acting attorney general since President Trump fired Pam Bondi in April and who previously served as Trump's personal criminal defense lawyer, spent hours fielding pointed questions—including a telling moment when he said he “is” the president's lawyer before catching himself and correcting it to “was.” The awkwardness captures the central concern: whether a former personal attorney to the president can run the Justice Department as a neutral servant of the law rather than of the man who appointed him. Senators pressed him on the now-defunct anti-weaponization fund, the handling of the Epstein files, and Trump's pardons for January 6 defendants. The math is what makes this precarious. The recent death of Senator Lindsey Graham left committee Republicans with just one vote to spare, and Senator John Cornyn—a lame duck—has said he isn't sold, meaning Blanche's advancement may rest largely in Cornyn's hands. The significance is about the independence of federal law enforcement: confirming a president's former defense lawyer as attorney general tests whether the Justice Department's prosecutorial power will be insulated from the president's personal interests, and the narrow margin means a single Republican could decide the outcome.Blanche to face Senate grilling in bid to be Trump's attorney general | ReutersThe Senate has confirmed a second Florida state appeals judge who ruled in President Trump's favor in his defamation suit against the Pulitzer Prize Board, giving him a lifetime seat on the federal bench. The vote was 51-46 along party lines to place Chief Judge Jeffrey Kuntz on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Here's the connection that drew scrutiny. Kuntz sat on the Florida appeals court panel that ruled for Trump on a personal-jurisdiction question, allowing his defamation case against the Pulitzer Board to move forward—and Kuntz wrote that panel ruling. He is now the second judge from that same panel to be nominated by Trump and confirmed to a lifetime federal judgeship. At his hearing, Kuntz defended his decision not to recuse from the Trump matter. The significance is about judicial independence and the appearance of a quid pro quo. There is nothing unusual about elevating state appellate judges to the federal bench, and a favorable ruling doesn't by itself prove anything improper. But when a president rewards judges who ruled for him personally with lifetime appointments, it raises an uncomfortable question about incentives—whether judges hoping for advancement might feel subtle pressure to favor the person doing the appointing—and that perception, critics argue, can corrode public confidence in an impartial judiciary even where each individual ruling was defensible on the merits.2nd Florida judge who ruled for Trump in Pulitzer case confirmed to federal bench | ReutersAnd finally, the Federal Trade Commission and the Ohio State Bar Association have thrown their support behind an Ohio Supreme Court proposal to loosen the American Bar Association's long-standing grip on who gets to become a lawyer. The proposal would let graduates of non-ABA-accredited law schools sit for the Ohio bar exam and would move toward a state-run accreditation process. Here's the structure worth understanding. In most states, you generally can't take the bar exam unless you graduated from a law school the ABA has accredited—which effectively makes the ABA the national gatekeeper of legal education. The FTC's objection is framed in competition terms: it argues the ABA's accreditation standards “go beyond what is reasonably necessary” to ensure lawyers are prepared, and that restricting the supply of lawyers this way may boost incumbent lawyers' pay while raising costs and reducing access for ordinary people who need legal help. Ohio isn't alone—Florida and Texas have already amended their rules so the ABA no longer has the final say, and Tennessee is weighing a similar move. The significance is a real shift in how the profession polices its own entry. Supporters see it as breaking up a monopoly to expand access to legal careers and legal services; critics worry that weakening a uniform national standard could erode the quality and consistency of legal training. Either way, the ABA's decades-long role as the sole gatekeeper is eroding, state by state.State bar, FTC back Ohio proposal to limit ABA role in lawyer admissions | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

About Conan Higgins Dr. Higgins is an international business attorney, crisis leadership consultant, and Amazon #1 Bestselling author who has spent his career operating where most people only theorize. Before embarking on his illustrious academic journey, Conan served as a Joint Terminal Attack Controller with U.S. Air Force Special Operations—including parachuting into enemy-held territory in Iraq—earning two Bronze Stars for Valor across combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. After more than 25 years of military service, he became a Washington State Trooper and SWAT team leader before transitioning to international crisis management, where he oversaw projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars across six continents, from the Middle East and Eastern Europe to West Africa and Latin America. Today, Conan serves as President and General Counsel of TSI Legal Enterprises, advising clients on complex international transactions, defense contracting, and export control compliance. He has consulted for the Government of Qatar, contributed to the World Bank/IMF's "Doing Business" report covering 189 economies, and held leadership positions in the American Bar Association's international law committees. His book, The Maverick's Blueprint: Crisis Leadership for an Unstable World, distills decades of operational experience into practical frameworks for leaders facing high-stakes decisions. He also writes the Princess Gumdrop children's book series—proof that even operators have a softer side. Episode Notes 00:00 Conan J. Higgins - WIP 10:17 Lesson 1: The Signal Was Always There 14:10 Lesson 2: The Plan Dies on First Contact 15:59 Lesson 3: Calm Is Contagious 17:31 Lesson 4: Crisis Does Not Build Character 18:59 Lesson 5: Decide Who You Are Before the Phone Rings 23:03 Lesson 6: Give People a Job 27:45 Lesson 7: Train for the Day, Not for the Drill 31:24 Lesson 8: Relationships Are the Only Currency That Compounds 34:20 Lesson 9: Read the Room Before You Read the Brief 36:17 Lesson 10: Authority Is Not the Same as Judgment

Are you as AI fluent as you should be? The American Bar Association's "21 Days of AI: A Grit and Growth Mindset Challenge" is a free online resource that offers a path toward becoming adept in the use of AI to enhance legal practice and professional development. In this episode, hosts Alicia Downey and James Hunsberger speak with legal innovation strategist and "21 Days of AI" co-author Gabrielle Kohlmeier about the origins of the Challenge and how closing the AI knowledge gender gap was a key driver of the project. Listen and learn how the "21 Days of AI" can level the AI fluency playing field not just for women lawyers, but for anyone contending with the AI revolution in their work and personal life. With special guest: Gabrielle ZA Kohlmeier, Principal and Founder, GK Strategic Advisory, former Verizon Global Head of Legal Change Related Links: The 21 Days of AI: A Grit and Growth Mindset Challenge  The Grit and Growth Mindset Project Hosted by: Alicia Downey, Downey Law and James Hunsberger, Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider

On this episode of the Temple 10-Q&A, Editor Kevin Sherry (LAW '26) sat down with Temple Law Professor Jonathan Lipson. Professor Lipson holds the Harold Kohn Chair and teaches a variety of business law subjects at Temple University Beasley School of Law.  Professor Lipson is a member of the American Law Institute and a Regent of the American College of Commercial Finance Lawyers, and has held various leadership positions in the Business Law Section of the American Bar Association.

Send us Fan MailWhen a person is sentenced to death, the case is not over.  Some of the most critical legal work happens after the trial and direct appeals are finished. That's where habeas attorneys step in, often years later, to uncover constitutional violations, investigate what was missed, and ask a fundamental question: did the system get it right?  John Hutchins has spent years representing death row inmates in these high-stakes post-conviction proceedings.  He's also been active in the American Bar Association's Death Penalty Representation Project, which focuses on improving the quality of legal representation in capital cases and addressing systemic gaps that can shape life-or-death outcomes. 

Susan Guthrie has been a divorce attorney and mediator for 35 years and she thinks that in almost all cases, your first hire in divorce should be a coach. This episode explains why. How do you find the right divorce coach for you? The popularity of divorce coaching has grown enormously, and with so many kinds of coaches out there, it can be hard to know what a divorce coach actually does or how to find the right one. People hear the word coach and think of life coaches, athletic coaches, business coaches, and divorce coaching gets lumped in with all of them. This episode clears that up and answers the questions many people need early in the divorce process. Susan is joined by Tracy Callahan and Debra Doak, the founders of The Divorce Coaches Academy, who train and support divorce coaches and are themselves practicing coaches, mediators, and Susan's colleagues in the dispute resolution field. They explain what a divorce coach really is, a flexible, goal-oriented process recognized by the American Bar Association as a form of alternative dispute resolution, designed to support and guide people through both the business side and the emotional management of divorce. Together they walk through how to find a coach who fits, what questions to ask on a complimentary discovery call, why training and certification matter in a field with no national standards, and how the right coach can save a client both time and money. Susan makes the case she has made before, that a divorce coach is an essential member of your team and often the best place to start, because the choice can shape who you hire next. Episode 2 of 8 in the Divorce & Beyond Summer Essentials Series This summer, Divorce & Beyond brings back 8 the episodes listeners reach for most, the conversations with the clearest, most practical guidance for anyone thinking about, going through, or rebuilding after divorce. New Essentials air every other Monday all summer. Follow the show so you never miss one. The series starts here. What You'll Learn What a divorce coach actually is, and why the American Bar Association recognizes divorce coaching as a form of alternative dispute resolution Why finding a coach before an attorney can change who you hire and how your whole divorce unfolds How to tell if a coach is the right fit, from credentials and training to the complimentary discovery call What to ask about a coach's process, programs, pricing, and how they work before you commit Why training and certification matter in a field with no national standards, and what it means to coach from your scar and not from your wound About Our Guests: Tracy Callahan and Debra Doak Debra and Tracy are both committed to the profession of divorce coaching and the process of alternative dispute resolution. They are both CDC Certified Divorce Coaches®, authors, educators, and founding members of Divorce Coaches Academy, an online education platform that provides continuing education for practicing, professional divorce coaches. Tracy is a Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator, serves as the Manager of the Mentor and Peer Coaching Programs for the CDC Certified Divorce Coach® certifying body, and has built her practice and reputation as an alternative dispute resolution specialist and conflict expert over the past 13 years.  Get Tracy's book: Divorce: Taking the High Road: Simple Strategies for Creating a Healthy Divorce, Tracy Callahan contributor and reach out to her at www.mediatingmatters.com Debra is also a Certified Divorce Financial Analyst®, Ohio Supreme Court trained Family Court Mediator, and Betrayal Trauma Specialist.  Get Debra's book: High Conflict Divorce for Women and reach out to her at www.debradoak.com For More Information on Tracy, Debra and The Divorce Coaches Academy: Website:  https://www.divorcecoachesacademy.com/ Email: dca@divorcecoachesacademy Social Media Handles  IG: @divorcecoachesacademy FB: @divorcecoachesacademy LI: divorce-coaches-academy Twitter: @AcademyDivorce If This Episode Helped You Follow Divorce & Beyond so you never miss an episode. Share it with someone who needs clear, reliable guidance right now. And if you have a moment, a five-star review makes a real difference in helping the show reach the people who need it most. Follow Divorce & Beyond Website: divorceandbeyondpod.com Instagram: instagram.com/divorceandbeyondpod About the Host: Susan Guthrie, Esq. Susan Guthrie is one of the nation's leading family law and mediation attorneys, with more than 35 years of experience helping people navigate divorce with clarity and strategy. She is the Immediate Past Chair of the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution, a best-selling author, and a sought-after speaker and trainer. Susan recently appeared as the featured expert on The Oprah Podcast and has been cited in The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Town & Country, The Washington Post, NewsNation, and NBC Chicago Today, among others. As the creator and host of Divorce & Beyond, ranked in the top 1% of all podcasts worldwide with more than 1.3 million downloads and an Apple Top 100 Self-Help designation, Susan brings together leading legal and mental health experts to help listeners move through divorce and into what comes next. Learn more at divorceandbeyondpod.com/about.   Disclaimer: The commentary and opinions shared on this podcast are for informational and entertainment purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney in your state regarding your specific situation.  

We'd love to hear from you. Send us fan mail!Workplace dispute resolution is one of the least discussed and most costly blindspots in executive leadership. In this episode of Shedding the Corporate B!tch, executive coach Bernadette Boas sits down with Felicia Harris Hoss, of Harris Hoss Mediations & Arbitration, a nationally recognized mediator with 30 years of trial law experience, to break down early dispute resolution and why it is one of the most powerful, underutilized tools available to corporate executives and HR leaders.Felicia explains why less than five percent of filed lawsuits ever reach trial, what that means for how executives should be approaching conflict, and why the decision to mediate early is not a sign of weakness, it is a strategic move that preserves relationships, resources, and reputation. She walks through the four Cs of mediation, the questions every executive should be asking their attorney, and how to shift from a reacting posture to a responding one in any dispute.If you lead people, manage HR concerns, or sit in any seat where workplace conflict can escalate into legal action, this conversation will change how you think about resolution. What You Will Learn• What early dispute resolution (EDR) is and why it is ABA official policy• When to engage a mediator before a lawsuit is filed• Why litigation means surrendering control — and what executives can do instead• The four Cs of mediation: confidentiality, control, creativity, certainty• What questions to ask your attorney about workplace disputes and resolution options• How the respond vs. react mindset shifts negotiation outcomes• What 'winning' actually looks like in a corporate dispute Key Quote"If you go to the courthouse, you pass that baton called control to strangers. — Felicia Harris Hoss" Episode Chapters00:00:00 — The Legal Dispute Already Living in Your Organization 00:02:00 — Why Staying in the Room Changes Everything 00:03:00 — Meet Felicia Harris-Hoss: From Trial Partner to Neutral 00:06:00 — What Mediation Actually Is (And Isn't) 00:09:00 — Workplace Scenarios That Call for a Mediator 00:12:00 — Why Early Mediation — Before Positions Harden 00:13:00 — The Human Cost Behind Every Corporate Lawsuit 00:15:00 — Why Early Mediation Wasn't Working — And What Changed 00:17:00 — Ego, Fear, and the Real Reason Leaders Avoid Resolution 00:18:00 — The Courtroom Hands Control to Strangers 00:21:00 — The Four C's of Mediation: Confidentiality, Control, Creativity, Certainty 00:26:00 — Key Questions Every Leader Should Ask Their Attorney 00:27:00 — What to Know Before You Bring a Dispute to HR 00:31:00 — Why Even Lawyers Get Confirmation Bias 00:32:00 — Respond, Don't React: The Mindset That Changes Outcomes 00:34:00 — Bernadette's Takeaways for Every Leader and HR Professional About the GuestFelicia Harris Hoss, of Harris Hoss Mediations & Arbitration, is a 30-year trial attorney and nationally credentialed mediator who specializes in early dispute resolution for executives, corporations, and complex business conflicts. She co-authored Resolution 500 for the American Bar Association, which was unanimously adopted in 2024, making early dispute resolution official ABA policy. She also helped establish the American Arbitration Association's EDR Mediation Panel.Learn more at HarrisHossPLLC| Connect on LinkedIn HERE Related Episodes Employee Engagement Strategies That Actually Move the Needle with Ian Watts— HEREYour Calendar is Lying - The Timer Leadership Framework— HERESlow Down To Go Fast with Loretta Stagnitto — HERE Subscribe CTAIf this conversation gave you a new way to think about conflict, leadership, and control, subscribe to Shedding the Corporate Bitch on YouTube at @ShedtheCorpBitchTV for new episodes every week. You can also DOWNLOAD our free Leadership Gap Diagnostic and identify where your leadership needs the most attention right now. Support the show

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/trinedaypress Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/trinedaypress X: https://x.com/TrineDay In this Episode, Kris Millegan and Todd Baumann talk to TrineDay authors Dan Luzadder and Bill Conroy about corruption and how it operates, and what we can DO about it. Bill Conroy is the author of The Great Pretense: A Tour Through the Boneyard of the CIA's War for Drugs: https://trineday.com/products/the-great-pretense-a-tour-through-the-boneyards-of-the-cia-s-war-for-drugsConroy's 40-year journalism career has focused heavily on investigative reporting — as an editor-in-chief, managing editor and reporter. His work has been published online and in print for a range of publications, including daily newspapers; alternative and business weeklies; magazines; and national online publications, such as the Daily Beast, Narco News and HousingWire. He also have appeared in investigative documentaries aired by major networks, including the BBC, CNBC, the History Channel, Prime Video and Al Jazeera-Europe. Dan Luzadder is the author of The Manchurian Journalist: Lawrence Wright, the CIA, and the Corruption of American Journalism: https://trineday.com/products/manchurian-journalist-lawrence-wright-the-cia-and-the-corruption-of-american-journalismDan Luzadder is an American journalist and author whose lengthy newspaper career began as a teenaged police reporter in the last days of linotypes. He came of age amid hagiographic newsroom characters who believed shoe leather reporting, tight deadlines and well-placed sources were journalism's divinity. He has written for the New York Daily News and the New York Times, shared a Pulitzer Prize (1983) for general local reporting, won a national public service award from the American Bar Association for exposing corruption in federal courts, and is a member of the Scripps Howard Journalism Hall of Fame. He resides with his wife, Nancy, in the Pacific Northwest. He is the author of The Manchurian Journalist: Lawrence Wright, the CIA and the Corruption of American Journalism. (Trine Day). He is currently at work on a book and investigative documentary series on a cold-case crime spree in Speedway, Indiana in 1978, and is completing a book exploring the American myth of Al Capone.

 The Journey 189: Corruption 101 with John Loftus and Dan Luzadder – A Continuing Education TrineDay socialsFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/trinedaypressInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/trinedaypressX: https://x.com/TrineDayKris Millegan and Todd Baumann speak to John Loftus and Dan Luzadder about the realities of corruption in government and the press.John Loftus is the author of America's Nazi Secret among several other books, and his new upcoming book My Client's Were Spies about his time as an attorney for sources in the Intelligence Community hoping to get more information about certain events in American history declassified, like he had done with the material on OPERATION PAPERCLIP in the 1980s, which produced an appearance on 60 Minutes in 1982 that was nominated for an Emmy award.America's Nazi Secret: https://trineday.com/products/americas-nazi-secretMy Clients Were Spies: https://trineday.com/products/myclients-were-spiesDan Luzadder is an American journalist and author whose lengthy newspaper career began as a teenaged police reporter in the last days of linotypes. He came of age amid hagiographic newsroom characters who believed shoe leather reporting, tight deadlines and well-placed sources were journalism's divinity. He has written for the New York Daily News and the New York Times, shared a Pulitzer Prize (1983) for general local reporting, won a national public service award from the American Bar Association for exposing corruption in federal courts, and is a member of the Scripps Howard Journalism Hall of Fame. He resides with his wife, Nancy, in the Pacific Northwest. He is the author of The Manchurian Journalist: Lawrence Wright, the CIA and the Corruption of American Journalism. (Trine Day). He is currently at work on a book and investigative documentary series on a cold-case crime spree in Speedway, Indiana in 1978, and is completing a book exploring the American myth of Al Capone.Manchurian Journalist: Lawrence Wright, the CIA, and the Corruption of American Journalism: https://trineday.com/products/manchurian-journalist-lawrence-wright-the-cia-and-the-corruption-of-american-journalism

What if the most powerful evidence in a personal injury case isn't a medical report or an expert opinion, but the story told by the people who watched someone's life change forever? Board-Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig sits down with Bobby Craig of Impact Video to pull back the curtain on settlement documentaries and explain why they've become one of the most effective tools in serious injury and wrongful death cases.In this episode of After the Crash, David and Bobby break down exactly what goes into creating a settlement documentary, from the initial planning meetings with the legal team all the way through interviews, editing, and final delivery. Bobby Craig, co-owner of Impact Video, has produced hundreds of these documentaries for law firms across the country. He got his start working alongside David at Craig, Kelley & Faultless, where he learned firsthand how telling a client's story with the right approach can fundamentally shift how a case is evaluated by insurance adjusters, defense attorneys, and claims decision-makers.✔️ What a settlement documentary is and how it differs from a standard legal video✔️ Why before-and-after witnesses often matter more than medical records alone✔️ How a passionate expert on camera can transform a case's perceived value✔️ The role of music, lighting, editing, and B-roll in communicating real emotion without exaggeration✔️ Why defense lawyers have directly told David that settlement videos change how they evaluate casesDavid Craig is one of the few attorneys in the U.S. who is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, accredited by the American Bar Association. With 39+ years handling semi-truck wreck cases and catastrophic injury claims, David brings a depth of experience that shapes every part of how his firm prepares a case, including the decision of when and how to invest in a settlement documentary. That experience is exactly why a defense attorney once told David, off the record, to keep making these videos because they genuinely shift how claims professionals assess a case.

This Day in Legal History: The National Defense Act of 1916On this day in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson signed the National Defense Act, the law that quietly built the legal scaffolding for how the United States deploys soldiers, both abroad and at home, for the next century-plus. The Act roughly tripled the size of the regular Army, formally created the National Guard as a federalized reserve force out of the patchwork of state militias that had existed since the founding, and established the Reserve Officers' Training Corps at colleges and universities. The legal hook is the dual-status structure that the Act created and that we still use today: the National Guard belongs simultaneously to its state and to the federal government, normally takes orders from the governor, but can be “federalized” by the President under specific statutory authorities and pulled out of state command for federal missions. That structure has driven a long line of constitutional fights about the limits of presidential authority to call up the Guard, about whether and when the Insurrection Act applies, and about how the Posse Comitatus Act constrains the use of federal troops for domestic law enforcement. June 3 is not a day most people associate with American military law, but the 1916 statute is doing quiet work behind every modern headline about troops at a border, troops in a city, or troops in a hurricane.The Eleventh Circuit on Tuesday handed down a ruling that strips hip-hop group 2 Live Crew of the copyrights it thought it had successfully clawed back to five of its albums, including “As Nasty as They Wanna Be,” because one member's bankruptcy from the 1990s swept his future termination rights into the bankruptcy estate. Federal copyright law has a wonderfully democratic provision in Section 203: an author who signed away a copyright can, 35 years later, send a termination notice and take it back, regardless of what the original contract said. The catch the Eleventh Circuit identified is Section 541 of the Bankruptcy Code, which scoops up almost everything you own into the bankruptcy estate when you file — including, the court said, the right to send that termination notice years later, even though the right cannot be sold or contracted away in any other context. The practical consequence for 2 Live Crew is that member Mark Ross, who performed as Brother Marquis, had unwittingly transferred his future termination interests to his bankruptcy trustee when he filed Chapter 7 years earlier, so when the group's heirs and surviving members later tried to take the copyrights back from Lil' Joe Records in 2020, they were one vote short of the majority the statute requires. The case, Lil' Joe Records v. Christopher Won Jr. et al., No. 24-13978, is described in the opinion as “a question of first impression at the intersection of copyright and bankruptcy” — which is lawyer-speak for “we just made up the rule, and now it's the rule.” Expect every copyright-termination case where any author has ever filed for bankruptcy to cite this decision for the next decade.11th Circ. Reverses 2 Live Crew's Copyright Clawback Win | Law360President Trump on Tuesday quietly signed a finalized version of the AI cybersecurity executive order that he had abruptly scrapped during a planned signing ceremony on May 21, and the final version is notably narrower than the one that was on the table a month ago. The new order asks Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, and other federal agencies to design a voluntary framework under which developers of so-called frontier AI models — the largest and most general-purpose systems — would share their models with the federal government for up to 30 days before public release so the government can scan for security vulnerabilities. The legal posture is worth pausing on: this is a voluntary framework, not a regulation, which means it lives in the same constitutional space as a chamber-of-commerce best-practices document rather than as a binding rule subject to APA notice and comment. That structure is partly a workaround for the fact that there is no federal statute giving any agency authority to mandate pre-release safety testing of AI models, and partly a response to industry pressure: Trump explained on May 21 that he scrapped the earlier 90-day version because he thought it could be “a blocker” to U.S. leadership in AI. Whether developers actually opt in is the open question, and the order is structured so that participation will likely depend on a mix of national-security pressure, federal procurement leverage, and quiet diplomacy with the major labs. Expect the first real fight to be over what counts as a “frontier” model, and who decides.Finalized Trump Order Seeks Early Cyber Tests Of AI Models | Law360The U.S. Senate on Tuesday confirmed Katie Lane to be a federal district judge in Montana, making her the first judicial nominee of Trump's second term to be confirmed despite a “not qualified” rating from the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary. The ABA's role here is informal but historically important: since 1953 the Standing Committee has rated federal judicial nominees as “well qualified,” “qualified,” or “not qualified” based on professional competence, integrity, and judicial temperament, and the rating has carried real weight with senators of both parties — until it didn't. The Trump administration formally cut ties with the ABA review process during the first term, on the theory that the ABA's ratings reflected an ideological bias against conservative nominees, and the second administration has been even more open about ignoring “not qualified” ratings as a matter of policy. The legal stakes of this are modest in any individual case — a “not qualified” judge serves the same lifetime appointment with the same constitutional power as a “well qualified” one — but cumulatively the practice changes the relationship between the bar and the bench in a way that is hard to undo, and it nudges the federal judiciary in a direction that depends almost entirely on the political branches' definitions of professional fitness. Lane, who is now confirmed, will join the District of Montana, a small but busy bench. Watch this space: there are several more nominees in the pipeline with similar ratings.US Senate confirms Trump judicial nominee deemed ‘not qualified' by ABA | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Relativity is a Sponsor of Litigation Radio. On this episode, we will hear from Cristin Traylor, Senior Director of AI transformation & law firm strategy at Relativity. The selection of Relativity as the subject of this interview should not be construed as an endorsement by the American Bar Association of Relativity and its services. Generative AI technology is transforming the world of legal e-discovery from start to finish, and it's advancing by the day. Guest Cristin Traylor is an attorney and the senior director of AI transformation & law firm strategy at Relativity, a leading legal data intelligence company.  Where is AI taking the legal world, and how is it changing the way legal teams sift, manage, and use the electronic data delivered during discovery? Forget boxes of legal paperwork and records. Today, AI can organize and analyze terabytes of digital information. But understanding the technology and its pitfalls—and knowing how to train an AI model—is vital to getting results that matter to uncover the story told by the data. The use of AI in the electronic discovery process and the ability to dig into digital data dumps is not something any firm can afford to put off. This is today's legal environment and the future of discovery. What are you missing? What might opposing counsel understand that you don't? If you don't employ an AI tool, should you? If you have access to AI tools, do you know how to manage them, “train” them, and write effective prompts? You most likely didn't learn this in law school. You probably don't know what you don't know. Traylor offers a fascinating glimpse into the present and future of legal generative AI technology. You probably don't know what you don't know. Also in this episode, quick tips from Lauren Williams as she discusses building a career while also taking care of your own wellbeing. Have a question, comment, or suggestion for an upcoming episode? Get in touch at MRogson@SkywardInsurance.com or JAReederJr@gmail.com.  Resources Mentioned:  Relativity aiR case strategy technology “More Da Silva: 3 Takeaways from Judge Peck's 'Rio Tinto' Opinion,” by Constantine Pappas “EEOC v. Tesla, Inc.: Is GenAI Moving into Mainstream Legal Disclosure?” “Sedona Principle 6 and the Duty to Evaluate” American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section

Board-Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig exposes one of the most dangerous schemes in the trucking industry: chameleon carriers. These are trucking companies that dodge government shutdowns by changing their name, getting a new DOT number, and putting the same dangerous trucks back on the road. They're 3 to 4 times more likely to cause a fatal wreck.In this episode of Ask David, David sits down with Litigation Supervisor Ashley Napier to break down how chameleon carriers operate and why they're so hard to catch. They walk through real cases, including the McGill case near North Vernon, Indiana, where an insurance company helped a failing trucking company reorganize under a new name. The barn still had the old company name painted on it. Same trucks, same faulty brakes. Those brakes failed, killing two people.✔️ What chameleon carriers are and how they rebrand to avoid shutdowns✔️ Why they're 3 to 4 times more likely to cause fatal wrecks✔️ The McGill case: how an insurer helped a dangerous carrier reorganize✔️ Why federal insurance minimums haven't been raised since the 1980s✔️ How raising minimums to $5 million would force better screening✔️ What to look for when investigating a chameleon carrier wreckDavid Craig is one of only four attorneys in Indiana who is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, accredited by the American Bar Association. He has 39+ years handling semi-truck wreck cases.

Today's guest, Dr. Larry Richard, practiced as a trial attorney for 10 years before earning a PhD in organizational psychology. Today, he is a leading expert on why lawyers behave the way they do. For over 30 years, Dr. Richard has been researching how lawyers behave and why. He founded LawyerBrain LLC, which advises the leaders of major law firms on the human side of running a practice—things like culture, leadership, change management, resilience, and collaboration. Here are the 7 outlier personality traits that characterize lawyers, according to Dr. Richard's research: •    Much higher level of skepticism than the general public •    Much higher need for autonomy •    Higher level of abstract reasoning—lawyers like using their intellect to solve problems, but also like to argue •    Higher level of urgency—lawyers want closure, are impatient •    Lower level of empathy—less inclined to take the perspective of others •    Lower level of sociability—i.e., not very comfortable with emotional vulnerability, very private, guarded about personal issues •    And, the most important one—lawyers are dramatically and pervasively low in resilience (i.e., 20% lower average resilience score than the general public, and 90% of lawyers have a resilience score in the bottom half of the scale! That makes us thin-skinned, insecure, defensive, and easily wounded.) Dr. Richard and his wife, D'Arcy Lyness, PhD, also a psychologist, have just written a book entitled Thin-Skinned: Why Lawyers Are So Low in Resilience, and the New Science That Can Help. It will be published by the American Bar Association in July of 2026. The book explains why lawyers are so consistently low in resilience, and then offers over 50 different scientifically supported self-help practices that can help lawyers build resilience, manage stress, and improve overall well-being. Join us on this episode today to explore why lawyers, according to Dr. Richard, are among the least resilient professionals in the workplace. We talk about how the deeply ingrained skepticism of attorneys is colliding with the unprecedented pace of change brought on by AI and a rapidly evolving legal landscape. Read the full transcript of today's episode here: https://www.seyfarth.com/dir_docs/podcast_transcripts/Pioneers_Dr.-Larry-Richard-Returns.pdf

Sarah Parshall Perry of Defending Education joins Freedom to Learn for a fast-moving conversation on the biggest legal and policy fights in education today. We cover the launch of Defending Education's new litigation center, the power of accrediting bodies like the American Bar Association, and what's at stake for free speech and parental rights in […]

The fight to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion has deep historical roots, marked by significant milestones and challenges, from the Civil Rights era to present-day initiatives, including the recent Supreme Court decision on affirmative action. Robert J. Grey Jr., President of the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) and former President of the American Bar Association, has witnessed several pivotal moments in this ongoing battle. His experiences growing up during these transformative times have profoundly influenced his career and dedication to both leadership and advancing diversity in the legal profession.In this episode of the Branding Room Only podcast, Robert delves into his impactful career and the current state of diversity in law and society. He discusses the vital work of LCLD, the importance of mentorship, and the lessons learned from career successes and setbacks. Robert shares his insights on what it takes to continue moving forward and build a legacy that inspires.1:36 - Aspects of a successful personal brand, how Robert defines his brand, and his favorite quote and hype song9:20 - How his upbringing and schooling impacted Robert's brand and career17:43 - What Robert learned about himself in not winning the 2008 Richmond mayoral race21:07 - What the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity is and why it's important26:32 - Robert's insights into the state of diversity in the country and the legal profession32:34 - A broader concept of mentorship and how it can be critical to your brand37:03 - How Robert made jury improvement and preservation his focus as American Bar Association president43:07 - The legacy Robert hopes to leave behind and what he does for fun49:39 - The inflection point confronting us right now and why persistence is so criticalMentioned In Building a Legacy: Insights on Leadership and Diversity in the Law with Robert Grey Jr.Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) | X/TwitterAmerican Bar AssociationLegal Services CorporationCurated Resources from PaulaSign up for Paula's Upcoming WebinarsLearn More About Paula's Personal Branding Strategy Session OfferSubscribe to The Branding Room Only on YouTubeCall to ActionFollow & Review: Help others find the podcast. Subscribe and leave a quick review.Want more branding insights? Join Paula's newsletter for expert tips and exclusive content! Subscribe HereConferences are an investment—make sure you maximize yours. My Engage Your Hustle™ Conference Playbook gives you the strategies to prepare, stand out, and follow up with impact. Get your copy today.Sponsor for this episodeThis episode is brought to you by PGE Consulting Group LLC.PGE Consulting Group LLC empowers individuals and organizations to lead with purpose, presence, and impact. Specializing in leadership development and personal branding, we offer keynotes, custom programming, consulting, and strategic advising—all designed to elevate influence and performance at every level.Founded and led by Paula Edgar, our work centers on practical strategies that enhance professional development, strengthen workplace culture, and drive meaningful, measurable change.To learn more about Paula and her services, go to www.paulaedgar.com or contact her at info@paulaedgar.com, and follow Paula Edgar and PGE Consulting Group LLC on LinkedIn.

The Enlightened Family Business Podcast Ep. 160: The Family Factor: Why Some Families Survive Conflict and Others Don't with Doug Baumoel   In this episode of the Enlightened Family Business Podcast, host Chris Yonker sits down with Doug Baumoel, Founding Partner of Continuity Family Business Consulting and co-author of Deconstructing Conflict, for a deeply honest conversation about what actually tears family businesses apart — and what it takes to hold them together. Doug's path into this work is personal: he grew up as heir apparent in a thriving multi-generational family business that ultimately collapsed under the weight of poorly managed conflict, despite multiple consultants attempting to help. What he learned from that experience led him to develop the Conflict Equation Methodology, a systems-based framework rooted in the science of identity-based conflict — the kind of conflict that can't be mediated, negotiated, or governed away. In this conversation, Doug and Chris explore the critical distinction between disagreements, disputes, and true conflict; the concept of the Family Factor and why it's the single most important variable in any family business engagement; why governance overlaid on top of unresolved conflict is like pouring gasoline on a fire; and how trust is rebuilt not through warmth or wishful thinking, but through predictability. They also dig into early warning signs of passive and active conflict, why the first phone call from a prospective client can make or break an engagement, and what it really means to sacrifice for family. Episode Chapters ·       8:48   Meet Doug Baumoel ·       11:00  Growing Up as Heir Apparent — and Watching It Fall Apart ·       14:00  Why Most Family Business Consultants Made Things Worse ·       16:30  The Conflict Equation: A Systems Engineering Approach ·       19:00  Identity-Based Conflict vs. Civil Dispute ·       22:10  How Families Show Up: Stuck, Worried, or In Crisis ·       23:22  The First Phone Call and the Bias Trap ·       27:38  Family First or Business First? ·       31:08  The Family Factor: Compromise, Forgiveness, and Care ·       35:09  Are We Wired to Care for Each Other? ·       39:00  Early Warning Signs: Passive vs. Active Conflict ·       49:20  Why Governance Is Not a Conflict Solution ·       52:44  Building the Family Factor Across Generations ·       56:34  Resources and Farewell   Websites ·       continuityfbc.com ·       chrisyonker.com   Book ·       Deconstructing Conflict: Understanding Family Business, Shared Wealth, and Power — available on Amazon   About Doug Baumoel, MBA Doug Baumoel is the Founding Partner of Continuity Family Business Consulting, where he specializes in conflict management and leverages his extensive expertise in family business, family office operations, and governance. He draws from over 25 years of business experience — including starting and managing businesses in both the U.S. and Europe, where he established and led the European offices of his second-generation family enterprise — to develop a robust process for analyzing the key variables that influence family business conflict. He co-authored Deconstructing Conflict: Understanding Family Business, Shared Wealth, and Power with Continuity Managing Partner Blair Trippe. His insights have been featured in Family Business Magazine, Thomson West's Alternative Dispute Resolution Practice Guide, Private Company Director magazine, and Harvard's Negotiation Journal. A nationally recognized speaker, Doug has presented at the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School, Cornell University's Smith Family Business Initiative, the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD), the Family Firm Institute, the American Bar Association, Attorneys for Family-Held Enterprises (AFHE), and the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP). He serves as a board member of One Family Inc., a Massachusetts non-profit supporting families facing homelessness, and sits on the boards of a private foundation and a technology firm. Doug holds an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and a BS in Electrical Engineering from Cornell University. He is a Fellow of both the Family Firm Institute (FFI) and the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD), a Practitioner Scholar with Cornell's Smith Family Business Initiative, and a recipient of FFI's 2023 Interdisciplinary Award. Outside of work, he is an avid fingerstyle jazz guitarist who occasionally performs at charity events and jazz venues.

In this episode, learn about the intersection of animal protection and cruelty, domestic violence, and family law with two leaders in the field. Guests Maricarmen Garza is chief counsel for the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence and Megan Senatori is the executive director of the Center for Animal Law Studies at the Lewis & Clark Law School. The field of animal law is emerging as states, courts, and lawyers recognize how animal law and animal abuse plays into domestic violence and family law. Progress is being made, but this critical field isn't fully recognized or understood. In many cases, victims of domestic violence are forced into difficult situations, caught between their own safety and the safety of beloved animal family members. The American Bar Association recently recognized the issue through both its Animal Law Committee and the Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence. ABA's recently approved Resolution 504 calls for laws and judicial processes that protect domestic violence survivors and their pets through civil protection orders, domestic relations proceedings, and expanded access to safe housing. Litigators play a vital role in developing this area of law. Hear what you can do and where you can find legal guidance when protecting victims of domestic violence and their pets, from dogs and cats to horses and others. Have a question, comment, or suggestion for an upcoming episode? Get in touch at MRogson@SkywardInsurance.com or JAReederJr@gmail.com. Resources Mentioned:Five Ways Attorneys Can Support Domestic Violence Clients with Pets Sheltering Animals of Abuse Victims – Start Up Guide ABA Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section Animal Law Committee ABA Resolution 504 “ABA House Adopts Policy to Protect Domestic Violence Survivors and Their Pets” American Bar Association Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence American Bar Association Animal Law Committee American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section Subscribe to Litigation Radio: https://play.megaphone.fm/rhyxdryztyy2v3itq6sdlq Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Board-Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig sits down with "Trucker Steve," a CDL instructor with over 50 years of driving experience, to expose the broken reality of today's CDL training system.Steve spent 30 years at UPS before becoming a CDL instructor. He reveals how CDL schools exploit loopholes to push students through inadequate programs. From self-certification scams to 1:10 instructor-to-student ratios, these "CDL mills" are putting unqualified drivers behind the wheel of 40-ton vehicles.✔️ How Sean Duffy's 2025 CDL crackdown misses the real problems✔️ FMCSA self-certification loopholes that bypass proper training✔️ Electronic logs and "ghost drivers" defrauding team driver systems✔️ Medical examiners passing unfit drivers with sleep apnea✔️ Why underride guards could save lives in rear-end collisionsDavid Craig is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, accredited by the American Bar Association. With 39+ years handling semi-truck wreck cases, he holds trucking companies accountable.Most CDL schools only teach students to pass the test, not actually drive. Steve's YouTube channels "Trucker Steve CDL Instructor" and "The Broken CDL Trucking System" document these failures in real time.—01:43 – Trucker Steve's Background: From UPS to CDL Instructor05:03 – Driver Health & Medical Certification Problems09:09 – Sleep Apnea and Medical Examiners Who Look the Other Way14:15 – Sean Duffy's CDL School Crackdown: Too Little, Too Late?19:23 – FMC Self-Certification Loopholes Exposed25:23 – Why CDL Schools Are Broken: Instructor-to-Student Ratios31:40 – Non-Domiciled Drivers: Fixing the Wrong Problem?32:18 – English Proficiency Requirements for Commercial Drivers40:06 – Miles vs. Hours: How Truckers Get Paid Affects Safety45:09 – Ghost Drivers: Electronic Logs and Team Driver Fraud52:03 – Driver-Facing Cameras and Crash Avoidance Technology59:02 – Underride Guards Could Have Saved Lives1:01:01 – Quality Training at Trucking Companies: The Missing Link1:08:32 – The Real Driver Shortage vs. Retention Problem—If you or someone you know has been involved in a truck crash, don't wait.Visit https://ckflaw.com or call 1-800-ASK-DAVID for experienced legal help.—Why Listen to After the Crash?Navigating the aftermath of a trucking accident can feel overwhelming, but you don't have to face it alone. This podcast is designed to educate and empower victims and their families, helping you make informed decisions about your future.—Learn About the Firm:At Craig, Kelley & Faultless, LLC, we've dedicated over 30 years to fighting for trucking accident victims. From preserving evidence to holding negligent trucking companies accountable, our mission is to protect your rights and secure the justice you deserve.—Download Semitruck Wreck for FREE:https://www.ckflaw.com/truck-accident-ebook/Follow Us on Socials:Website: https://www.ckflaw.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ckflawLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/craig-kelley-&-faultless-attorneys-at-lawContact Us:Email: info@ckflaw.comPhone: 1-800-ASK-DAVID#CDLTraining #TruckingSafety #TruckAccident #CDLSchools #CommercialDrivers #TruckingIndustry #DavidCraig #CraigKelleyFaultless #TruckerSteve #FMCS

Investigative journalists ⁠⁠Mandy Matney⁠⁠ and ⁠Liz Farrell⁠⁠ and Attorney Eric Bland pull no punches as a brutal week looms. With Mandy's May 15 contempt hearing approaching and Eric facing his own all-day ODC deposition Wednesday, the trio breaks down what they call a coordinated campaign of harassment dressed up as litigation.  Mandy responds — emotionally and on the record — to a paltry excuse for journalism, including the reputationally damaging and wildly defamatory suggestion she might have information about the leaked Mallory Beach photos.  Liz lays out the timeline: Gregg Roman, the actual custodian of those photos, has dodged two depositions while Mandy gets ambushed in court.  Eric explains how the ODC has been weaponized against lawyers who do good work, with grievances quietly bundled for years. Plus Premium Members⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ hear our analysis on rumors of Alex Murdaugh's new trial, who will re-prosecute if Alan Wilson doesn't….? ☕ Cups Up! ⚖️ Episode References How can you support Mandy? Crowd the Courthouse

In this episode, learn about the intersection of animal protection and cruelty, domestic violence, and family law with two leaders in the field. Guests Maricarmen Garza is chief counsel for the American Bar Association Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence and Megan Senatori is the executive director of the Center for Animal Law Studies at the Lewis & Clark Law School. The field of animal law is emerging as states, courts, and lawyers recognize how animal law and animal abuse plays into domestic violence and family law. Progress is being made, but this critical field isn't fully recognized or understood. In many cases, victims of domestic violence are forced into difficult situations, caught between their own safety and the safety of beloved animal family members. The American Bar Association recently recognized the issue through both its Animal Law Committee and the Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence. ABA's recently approved Resolution 504 calls for laws and judicial processes that protect domestic violence survivors and their pets through civil protection orders, domestic relations proceedings, and expanded access to safe housing. Litigators play a vital role in developing this area of law. Hear what you can do and where you can find legal guidance when protecting victims of domestic violence and their pets, from dogs and cats to horses and others. Have a question, comment, or suggestion for an upcoming episode? Get in touch at MRogson@SkywardInsurance.com or JAReederJr@gmail.com. Resources Mentioned:Five Ways Attorneys Can Support Domestic Violence Clients with Pets Sheltering Animals of Abuse Victims – Start Up Guide ABA Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section Animal Law Committee ABA Resolution 504 “ABA House Adopts Policy to Protect Domestic Violence Survivors and Their Pets” American Bar Association Commission on Domestic & Sexual Violence American Bar Association Animal Law Committee American Bar Association American Bar Association Litigation Section

Board-Certified Truck Accident Attorney David Craig breaks down Indiana's radical new trucking law where 1,800 commercial drivers just lost their licenses overnight.In this episode of Ask David, David discusses the sweeping changes under Indiana House Enrolled Act 1200, which took effect April 1st. The law emerged after four horrific crashes involving non-domiciled drivers. David explains how the trucking industry's claim of a "driver shortage" led to a massive increase from 316,000 to 720,000 non-domiciled drivers between 2000 and 2021.✔️ What non-domiciled drivers are ✔️ How visa requirements changed for H-2A, H-1B, and E-2 classifications✔️ English proficiency crackdowns✔️ Indiana's ban on foreign language CDL testing✔️ Federal CDL school closures and quality control issues✔️ Criminal penalties: Level 6 felony charges for violationsDavid Craig is one of the few attorneys in the U.S. who is Board-Certified in Truck Accident Law by the National Board of Trial Advocacy and accredited by the American Bar Association. With 39+ years handling semi-truck wreck cases, he meets rigorous experience, ethics, and knowledge standards to hold trucking companies and unsafe drivers accountable.The four crashes that triggered this legislation represent real families who lost loved ones due to unqualified drivers on Indiana roads. The February Jay County crash alone claimed four lives when a non-domiciled driver with a bad record, working for a company with significant safety violations, caused a fatal wreck.

In this episode of The First Day from The Fund Raising School, Bill Stanczykiewicz, Ed.D., welcomes back Phil Purcell, Director of Planned Giving for the Central Territory of The Salvation Army, a veteran faculty member at The Fund Raising School, and nationally recognized expert on planned giving, nonprofit law, and charitable organizations. Phil joins the conversation fresh from leadership roles with the American Bar Association's charitable giving and organizations work, where he helps advance legal understanding across the nonprofit sector. Together, Bill and Phil tackle a topic that gets plenty of conference-room chatter but not always enough action: nonprofit collaboration, partnerships, and mergers. As Bill notes, everyone loves to say, “Those organizations should work together,” but actually making it happen can feel like trying to assemble IKEA furniture during a thunderstorm. The conversation begins with why nonprofits pursue partnerships or mergers in the first place. Phil explains that financial pressure is often one driver, especially when an organization has strong programs but a fragile bottom line. Grassroots organizations may also seek fiscal sponsorships or other partnerships because they have mission energy but not yet the fundraising base to sustain themselves. Other collaborations emerge from strategic opportunity, such as organizations with different strengths coming together to address a complex community challenge, or 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations coordinating around advocacy and public policy. Bill adds that donors can be powerful catalysts, sometimes asking why two organizations serving similar missions, neighborhoods, or populations are operating separately when a combined effort might produce greater impact. Bill and Phil then move into the human side of mergers, where the spreadsheets meet the feelings, and sometimes the feelings bring snacks and a lawyer. Phil emphasizes that while boards ultimately decide whether a merger or partnership moves forward, the idea may come from staff, board members, volunteers, thought leaders, or major donors. Still, staff may understandably feel anxious about redundancy, job security, and organizational change. Phil stresses that mission alignment and culture must be addressed before the legal documents arrive on the scene wearing sensible shoes. Work styles, leadership expectations, office norms, governance habits, and organizational identity all matter. Outside consultants can help by conducting interviews, assessing cultural fit, facilitating strategic conversations, and helping leaders determine whether the whole really can become greater than the sum of its parts. The episode closes with Phil outlining the legal and structural issues nonprofits must consider once collaboration becomes serious. He advises organizations to start by understanding exactly who they are legally: their true legal name, articles of incorporation, bylaws, tax-exempt status, state and federal standing, and any unusual provisions that may have been forgotten in the filing cabinet of history. From there, a merger may require a plan of merger, articles of merger, decisions about which entity survives, and attention to state law differences. Phil also explains alternatives to full mergers, including fiscal sponsorships and supporting organization structures, each with its own responsibilities, agreements, and governance questions. Above all, he reminds listeners not to overlook donor intent, restricted gifts, leadership structure, and stakeholder trust. The takeaway is clear: nonprofit collaboration is complicated, emotional, legal, financial, and cultural; but when it strengthens mission, it can be well worth the work.

This Day in Legal History: May Day vs. Law DayOn May 1, 1958, the United States marked the first Law Day, a civic observance created after President Dwight D. Eisenhower designated the date as a national occasion to honor the rule of law. Eisenhower's proclamation called on lawyers, journalists, broadcasters, schools, and civic groups to help the public better understand the American legal system. Congress later gave the observance formal status in 1961, making May 1 the country's official annual Law Day. The American Bar Association traces the idea to its former president Charles S. Rhyne, who wanted a national celebration of the legal system and the constitutional principles that support it.But May 1 already carried a different legal meaning long before it became Law Day. In the 1880s, organized labor made May 1 central to the campaign for the eight-hour workday. Labor leaders had called for May 1, 1886, to be the date when eight hours would be treated as the standard legal day's work. Workers around the country responded with strikes and rallies, turning May Day into an enduring symbol of labor rights. In Chicago, the demonstrations led into the Haymarket events, where violence, prosecutions, death sentences, and later pardons made the episode a lasting part of the legal history of labor organizing, criminal justice, and political speech.That makes May 1 one of the more complicated dates on the American legal calendar. Officially, it is Law Day, a celebration of courts, constitutional government, and respect for legal institutions. Historically, it is also May Day, a reminder that many legal protections were not simply handed down by courts or legislatures. They were demanded by workers, protesters, organizers, and communities willing to challenge existing law in the hope of changing it.A California federal trial over Elon Musk's challenge to OpenAI's shift toward a for-profit structure was paused Thursday after Musk's lawyers appeared to accidentally make Musk's $97.4 billion offer for OpenAI assets fair game at trial. The issue began when Jared Birchall, who runs Musk's family office, testified that he helped organize investors who made the offer because they believed Sam Altman's role on both sides of OpenAI's restructuring created a conflict. OpenAI's lawyers then challenged Birchall's testimony, arguing that his views about Altman were partly based on what attorneys told him rather than his own firsthand knowledge.Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers sent the jury home early and questioned Birchall herself, pressing him on how the investor group arrived at the massive offer amount. She seemed unconvinced by his answers and told Musk's counsel that they had “opened the door” to evidence that previously had been limited by a magistrate judge. The judge then demanded to know who on Musk's team suggested asking Birchall about the offer, and attorney Marc Toberoff ultimately said he had. Birchall also acknowledged that Toberoff created the financial analysis behind the offer and sent a letter to California regulators opposing OpenAI's restructuring.Musk's lawyers argued that OpenAI first brought up the offer letter during Musk's cross-examination and that there had been confusion about whether the document was admitted by agreement. Judge Gonzalez Rogers did not immediately decide how to handle the dispute and set a Friday hearing on the issue and jury instructions. The broader trial centers on Musk's claim that OpenAI, Altman, Brockman, and Microsoft breached OpenAI's charitable-trust obligations by moving away from its nonprofit mission for private gain. Earlier in the day, the judge also barred Musk's AI expert from testifying about broad catastrophic risks of artificial intelligence, saying the case is about breach of trust, not the future danger of AI.OpenAI Judge Pauses Trial To Probe Musk Attys On $97B Bid - Law360 UKPurdue Pharma received approval from a New York bankruptcy judge for a $125 million settlement with McKinsey & Co. over claims connected to McKinsey's consulting work on Purdue's opioid sales and marketing. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean H. Lane found the deal fair and reasonable, allowing Purdue to stay on schedule to exit Chapter 11 and activate its $7.4 billion bankruptcy plan. McKinsey will pay the settlement in two parts, starting with $65 million shortly after Purdue leaves bankruptcy. About $50 million from that first payment will go to personal injury claimants, while the remaining money will benefit state and local governments and Native American tribes through a trust.The deal followed mediation involving Purdue, the unsecured creditors committee, and other parties, with the creditors committee prepared to sue McKinsey if settlement talks failed. Purdue's bankruptcy has been heavily shaped by disputes over opioid-related liability, the Sackler family's contributions, and the legality of releasing third-party claims. The Supreme Court's 2024 ruling against nonconsensual third-party releases forced Purdue and its creditors to renegotiate the plan. The revised plan now includes a $6.5 billion Sackler family contribution and $900 million from Purdue. Purdue will be dissolved and replaced by Knoa Pharma, a public benefit company focused on addiction treatment and overdose reversal medications. The settlement also comes after McKinsey separately agreed to pay $650 million to resolve federal charges tied to its Purdue work.Purdue's $125M McKinsey Deal Gets OK Ahead Of Ch. 11 Exit - Law360A Reuters analysis found that Big Law hiring remains heavily concentrated among a small group of elite law schools, even though remote recruiting was expected to broaden access. In 2025, only 16 law schools sent at least half of their graduating class into associate jobs at firms with 251 or more lawyers. By contrast, 89 ABA-accredited schools placed 10% or fewer of their graduates in those jobs, and 11 schools placed none. Half of all law schools together produced only 10% of the 7,869 new large-firm associates, while just 21 top schools produced half of them.Nikia Gray of the National Association for Law Placement said the profession's emphasis on pedigree continues to block opportunities for capable students outside elite schools. During the pandemic, large-firm recruiting moved online, which made it easier for firms to interview students from more schools. But that change has not significantly widened the hiring pipeline. One reason is that firms are recruiting earlier, sometimes during students' first year before law school grades are available. With less law-school performance data to review, firms may lean more on undergraduate records, work experience, and the prestige of the law school itself.The article also notes that Columbia Law School had the highest percentage of 2025 graduates going to large firms, at 78%, and that most of the schools sending at least half their graduates into Big Law are also among the U.S. News “T-14.” The broader message is that recruiting technology changed, but the underlying hierarchy did not. Remote interviews may have made access to interviews easier, but they have not erased the structural advantage held by students at the most prestigious law schools.Pipeline to Big Law jobs stays narrow despite recruiting shifts | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

What is the process when a person wishes to represent themselves in court? How common is it? Is it true that a person who represents themselves "has a fool for a client?" Today in our "Ask a Judge" series, attorney and magistrate Amy Lin Meyerson and "small town lawyer" Ray Williams give tips for those who have no choice but to address the court on their own behalf. Here is the American Bar Association's virtual legal advice clinic (staffed by human legal minds, not AI!): https://abafreelegalanswers.org/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Day Break | America Under Pressure: Assassination Attempt, Iran Tensions, and What's Next --- 00:00 - Monologue 19:02 – Dr. Kurt Miceli, Chief Medical Officer at Do No Harm. Miceli discusses a watchdog effort urging the FTC to investigate a psychological association over alleged misleading statements related to youth gender treatments. He explains the broader implications for medical ethics and public trust. 38:04 - Monologue Featuring Ivey Gruber 46:59 – Joe Rieck, VP of Sales at Longevity. Rieck shares real-world success stories from customers using Longevity products, highlighting improvements in everyday health and quality of life. He emphasizes that the product is designed for a wide range of ages and lifestyles. Visit longevitywellness.co and use code GRUBER. 56:48 – Ashley Davis, national security expert and author of Power Pivot. Davis discusses the recent shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner and the response from leadership. The incident involved a gunman attempting to breach security before being stopped, with one agent injured but protected by body armor. 1:05:30 – Sarah Parshall Perry, Vice President and Senior Legal Fellow at Defending Education. Perry discusses a new report challenging the American Bar Association's influence over legal education. She explains how it could shape the future of law schools and the legal profession. 1:15:37 - Monologue 1:24:35 – Perry Johnson, businessman, author, and Michigan political candidate. Johnson discusses concerns surrounding Jocelyn Benson's reported ties and calls for greater transparency. He outlines why he believes accountability is needed. 1:33:57 – Sen. Jim Runestad, representing Michigan's 23rd Senate District. Runestad discusses new legislation aimed at closing loopholes in criminal sexual conduct sentencing. He explains how the proposal would strengthen protections and improve the justice system. 1:42:44 – Ivey Gruber, President of the Michigan Talk Network. Gruber continues discussion on the White House Correspondents' Dinner shooting and broader concerns about political rhetoric and public discourse. The segment explores how narratives and messaging may influence behavior and public perception. --- Check out our brand new podcast, 'Forgotten America'... The twelfth episode is live NOW at Steve Gruber on YouTube! Link below: https://youtu.be/1XbEJhJ6Wrk

This week, Ivy Slater, host of Her Success Story, chats with her guest, Asia Scarlett-Jones. The two talk about Asia's inspiring journey, what drove her to commit to family law, her fearless leap to start her own practice at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the lessons she's learned about leadership, building authentic relationships, and asking for help along the way. In this episode, we discuss: How Asia built her book of business from one client and a whole lot of courage, personally reaching out to everyone she knew, leveraging her court attorney and public-interest experience, owning her story on social media, and slowly refining who her true "ideal clients" are. What truly matters to her in networking: smaller, heart-to-heart relationship building, enjoying the room, becoming a trusted resource, and inviting others to "come meet my friends" rather than treating events like transactional referral hunts.​ When she realized she couldn't do it all, and chose to hire an executive assistant first to calm the chaos, followed by clerks, associates, and interns, she proudly helps them grow into their next chapters. Why Asia sees accepting help as a leadership strength, not a weakness. How she moved from "generic networking" to purpose-driven involvement, aligning with organizations like Women Owned Law, FamilyKind, and FDMC that match her values around women business owners, mediation, and healthier family transitions.​ Asia Scarlett-Jones, Esq. Founder & Managing Attorney, ASJ Law Office Asia Scarlett-Jones, Esq. is a force in family law, known for her forward-thinking leadership and dedication to helping professionals navigate divorce with strategy, efficiency, and dignity. As the Founder and Managing Attorney of ASJ Law Office, a boutique New York-based firm, she has redefined the family law experience, offering concierge-level legal services with a deep commitment to protecting what matters most: family, legacy, and peace of mind. Before launching ASJ Law Office, Mrs. Scarlett-Jones built a strong foundation in public service. She served as a Public Defender at the Nassau County Legal Aid Society, where she advocated for parents in custody and support matters, and later as a Principal Court Attorney in Nassau County Family Court, where she worked directly with Family Court judges to resolve complex legal issues and draft judicial decisions. Under her leadership, ASJ Law Office has become a trusted name for professionals seeking resolution- not conflict- in family matters. Her firm focuses on divorce, custody, child support, prenuptial agreements, and mediation, with a mission to guide clients through transitions with clarity and confidence. Mrs. Scarlett-Jones has been repeatedly recognized for her legal acumen and leadership. Her honors include Top 40 Under 40, The National Black Lawyers, New York Metro Rising Star, Super Lawyers Rising Star, Family Kind (2024), and National Academy of Family Law Attorneys. She currently serves on the Board of Directors for Family Kind, Family and Divorce Mediation Council of Greater New York (FDMC), and Women Owned Law (WOL). She also holds leadership roles, including Co-Chair of the Matrimonial and Family Law Committee of the Women's Bar Association of the State of New York and Co-Chair of the DEI Subcommittee of the Small Law Firm Committee, New York City Bar Association. Mrs. Scarlett-Jones is an active member of the New York City Bar Association, Family and Divorce Mediation Council, Women-Owned Law, Metropolitan Black Bar Association, New York Women's Bar Association, Family Kind, New York State Bar Association, Women's Bar Association of the State of New York, and American Bar Association. She earned her Juris Doctor from the Maurice A. Deane School of Law and her Bachelor's from the University at Albany.  Website: https://asjlawoffice.com/ Social Media Links: https://www.linkedin.com/in/asiascarlettjonesesq/