Podcast appearances and mentions of gibson dunn

President Trump’s February 18 “Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies” Executive Order directs independent regulatory agencies to submit for review all proposed and final significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Executive Office of the President. This joint webinar, sponsored by the Administrative Law and the Corporations, Securities & Antitrust Practice Groups, will discuss the real-world implications of this order for independent agencies, including the Federal Communications Committee and the Federal Trade Commission.Featuring:J. Howard Beales, III, Professor Emeritus of Strategic Management and Public Policy, School of Business, The George Washington UniversityHon. Susan E. Dudley, Founder, GW Regulatory Studies Center & Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, The George Washington UniversityThomas M. Johnson, Jr. Partner, Wiley Rein LLPProf. Adam White, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Co-Director, Antonin Scalia Law School’s C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative StateModerator: Svetlana Gans, Partner, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher--To register, click the link above.

Sarah Isgur and David French discuss the Supreme Court's ruling to uphold the the ban on ghost guns. Is it really about the Second Amendment? Sarah and David are then joined by Gregg Costa—partner at Gibson Dunn and former Fifth Circuit judge—to explain the issue with universal injunctions and forum shopping. The Agenda: —I ain't afraid of no ghost (gun) —A big week for Justice Neil Gorsuch —Mens rea and regulation —False vs. misleading —$660 million, baby —Judiciary is politicized —Administrative Procedure Act and universal injunctions —Predicting SCOTUS outcomes Show Notes: —Gregg Costa's podcast: A View from the Bench Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings, click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of Great Women in Compliance, GWIC co-host Hemma Lomax sits down with compliance expert Kristy Grant-Hart, author of How to Be a Wildly Effective Compliance Officer. Kristy discusses the recent acquisition of her consulting group, Spark Compliance, by Diligent and shares her unique origin story that led her from a background in film and television to becoming a leading figure in the compliance world.  Tune in to learn about the four human motivators and the role of fear alongside ethical culture in compliance, the future skillsets required for compliance officers, and the integral role of community and networking in building a successful compliance career. Kristy also offers insights for Chief Compliance Officers seeking their next career steps and highlights the broader impact compliance professionals have on changing the business world. Highlights Include: The recent acquisition of Spark Compliance Consultancy by Diligent Kristy's journey from the film and entertainment industry to law and compliance The skills and attitudes that will future-proof your compliance career The key motivators to consider when influencing human behavior and culture The role of community, collaboration, and following your passion.  Biography Kristy Grant-Hart is the Vice President, Head of Advisory Services, Spark Compliance, a Diligent Brand. She's a renowned expert at transforming compliance departments into in-demand business assets. She is the author of several highly-acclaimed books, including the best-selling How to be a Wildly Effective Compliance Officer. She has advised Fortune 100 companies on international compliance and has created, implemented, and revamped compliance programs for major companies in Europe and the United States. Kristy was honored as a Trust Across America 2019 Top Thought Leader in Trust. A powerful and inspirational public speaker, Kristy provides keynote presentations to organizations and conferences globally. Kristy has written for and been featured in publications including the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Corporate Financier Magazine, Risk Universe Magazine, and on the cover of Compliance and Ethics Professional Magazine. She is a former adjunct professor at Delaware Law School, Widener University, teaching Global Compliance and Ethics.  Kristy was shortlisted for the Chief Compliance Officer of the Year award at the Women in Compliance Awards and was shortlisted again for the Compliance Innovator of the Year. Before launching Spark Compliance, a Diligent Brand, Kristy was the Chief Compliance Officer at United International Pictures, the joint distribution company for Paramount Pictures and Universal Pictures in 65+ countries. Kristy began her legal career at the international law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, where she worked in the firm's Los Angeles and London offices. While at Gibson Dunn, her team was nominated for Best Regulatory Law Firm of the Year at Thomson Reuter's Compliance Awards. Kristy graduated summa cum laude from Loyola Law School in California. She holds certification as a Corporate Compliance and Ethics Professional – International (CCEP-I) and is a member of the California Bar.

In this episode of Jane's LME Addiction, our head of LME coverage Jane Komsky brings in global chair of Gibson Dunn's restructuring group, Scott Greenberg, to discuss the evolution of cooperation agreements within liability management exercises. They discuss the different types of co-ops, why co-ops have become expected in US deals, their spread to the EU, and the validity of antitrust arguments.Find all our coverage on co-ops at 9fin.com.Have any feedback on the podcast? Send us a note at podcast@9fin.com — thanks for listening!

Houston's legal market wasn't always one of the most competitive arenas in Big Law. But today, 14 of the 15 largest law firms by revenue have an office in Space City. The market's growth has mirrored the explosion of the country's energy industry over the past decade or so. And the competition among law firms continues to evolve, as the biggest firms fight for their share of a market once dominated by local firms. On this episode of On the Merits, Bloomberg Law's Roy Strom spoke with Nick Dhesi, the managing partner of Latham & Watkins' Houston office, which is credited as the first to truly crack the once-insular market. Latham in February celebrated its 15th year in Houston. The firm has more than 120 lawyers in the city, the fifth-largest presence among the 100 largest firms by revenue, according to Leopard Solutions. Other firms, such as Kirkland & Ellis, Sidley Austin, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, and Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, have piled into the market, lured by its dominant oil and gas scene. Just last year, Paul Weiss made an unsuccessful effort to open in Houston, Bloomberg Law reported, which included an attempt to poach from Latham. Latham, the second-largest firm by revenue, now has a roughly $2 billion energy and infrastructure practice, led by Houston partner Justin Stolte. In the podcast, Dhesi talks about Latham's main competitors now, what a "dirt lawyer" is, and how the Texas legal market will respond to an economy that's branching out of the traditional oil and gas deals that powered its growth. He also discusses how the Houston and Dallas legal markets are different, and what Texas law schools have been doing to supply more high-caliber lawyers to all the top firms clamoring for talent in the state. Do you have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Defending litigation is a core function of The Legal Department, but class action cases are different. The stakes are higher, the risks are greater, and all eyes are on the General Counsel to steer the ship through what can be the highest litigation exposure a company can face. Not to worry, Chris Chorba, an expert class action defense lawyer at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, is here to help steady your nerves. Intelligent, creative, and passionate, Chris shares his insights on how to best position your company to defend class action lawsuits and how an arbitration agreement can be your best shakedown repellent. From choosing defense counsel to selecting a claims administrator, Chris shares what you need to know to steady the ship.

In this episode, Randel K. Johnson and Andrew Kilberg discuss the relationship between immigration enforcement and employment policy, with a focus on the unique challenges faced by both small and large businesses in maintaining compliance. Additionally, the experts examine the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), considering potential legislative reforms to better align incentives for small businesses while preserving accountability in immigration matters.Featuring:Randel Keith Johnson, Distinguished Immigration Scholar, Cornell Law SchoolAndrew Kilberg, Partner, Gibson Dunn

Theories of nuisance, market-share, and consumer protection liability have become increasingly popular among plaintiffs who cannot trace an alleged harm to any specific defendant. Recently, states and local governments have sought to impose market-share liability on companies based on allegedly misleading statements (or silence) about the potential effects of their products. These cases raise difficult legal issues that remain underdeveloped because the risk of a crippling damages award often pressures companies to settle claims early in litigation.Featuring:Mr. Theodore J. Boutrous, Partner, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLPMr. Elbert Lin, Chair, Issues & Appeals, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLPMr. Oramel H. Skinner, III, Executive Director, Alliance For ConsumersModerator: Hon. William H. Pryor, Jr., Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

RESOLVED: That Congress Can Ban TikTokFeaturing:Mr. Miguel Estrada, Partner, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP Mr. Patrick Philbin, Partner, Torridon Law PLLCModerator: Prof. Eugene Volokh, Thomas M. Siebel Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution; Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Distinguished Research Professor, UCLA School of Law

This week, I talk to Lael Weinberger about the doctrine of church autonomy—what it is and, more importantly, where it came from. Lael has written an excellent paper on the origins of church autonomy (here), as well as put to practice his musings in a recent amicus brief he filed in the D.C. Circuit in the case of O'Connell v. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (here). After we spent some time digging into Lael's past, we got to business discussing his paper and brief. Some of the topics we discussed included the definition and scope of church autonomy, the jurisdictional nature of this topic as it relates to the state and the church, the history of its development in the 19th century, and much more. Lael Weinberger is an attorney and legal scholar. He currently works of Gibson Dunn in Washington, D.C. (bio), and serves as a nonresident fellow at Stanford Law (bio). In the past, he clerked for Justice Neil Gorsuch on the United States Supreme Court, Judge Frank Easterbrook on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and Chief Justice Daniel Eismann on the Idaho Supreme Court. He earned a law degree with high honors from the University of Chicago Law School. He also holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, with a focus on American legal history. Cross & Gavel is a production of CHRISTIAN LEGAL SOCIETY. The episode was produced by Josh Deng, with music from Vexento.

This Day in Legal History: NYC Rent ControlOn November 1, 1943, New York City implemented rent control for the first time, under the federal Office of Price Administration (OPA), in response to housing scarcity and skyrocketing rents caused by World War II. As millions flocked to urban centers for war-related jobs, New York's housing demand surged, outpacing supply and creating a crisis of affordability. To protect tenants from exploitative rent increases, the OPA set strict limits on rent hikes, freezing rates at March 1, 1943 levels. This marked one of the first large-scale interventions by the federal government in the private rental market, signaling an extraordinary step toward tenant protections in the U.S. Rent control in New York City became a hotly debated issue, with proponents arguing it was essential to ensure stable, affordable housing and opponents claiming it would stifle investment in housing maintenance and new development. The 1943 regulations laid the groundwork for the modern rent control policies still seen in New York City today, although the laws have since evolved with the establishment of state and local rent stabilization laws in the 1970s. The legacy of these rent controls remains significant; they continue to influence housing policies across the United States, serving as both a blueprint and a cautionary tale for balancing tenants' rights with landlords' financial incentives. Over time, New York's rent control laws have been adjusted but remain among the most stringent in the country, applying to thousands of apartments even as new buildings and market-rate rentals transform the city. The establishment of rent control in wartime New York thus represents an enduring chapter in housing law, reflecting ongoing tensions between affordability and market freedoms.Former President Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against CBS Broadcasting Inc., accusing the network of election interference by altering an interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump claims CBS edited Harris's responses to questions about the Gaza conflict to improve her image, removing what he describes as a confusing answer and replacing it with a clearer response in a second airing of the interview on 60 Minutes. Trump argues that the alteration violates federal laws prohibiting intentional news distortion, stating that CBS's reasoning—that the edits were made for time constraints—is implausible. The lawsuit, filed in Texas federal court, seeks $10 billion in damages, claiming harm to Trump's fundraising efforts. Trump also requests that CBS release the full, unedited transcript and remove the modified version of the interview. CBS, denying the claims, asserts that the lawsuit lacks merit and that no part of Harris's answer was hidden. The legal team representing Trump includes Edward Andrew Paltzik, Daniel Z. Epstein, and Chris D. Parker.Trump Sues CBS, Says Harris Interview Was Edited To Help Her (1)Since the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, state supreme court elections have become key battlegrounds in the fight over abortion rights. This ruling shifted control over abortion laws to the states, leading to abortion bans in conservative states and constitutional amendments in several others protecting abortion rights. Consequently, state supreme courts, which interpret state constitutions, are seeing increased attention and record campaign spending, especially in states like Michigan, Ohio, Montana, and North Carolina.In Michigan and Ohio, advocacy groups are supporting pro-abortion rights candidates, aiming to shape court rulings on abortion-related cases. Planned Parenthood Votes and other Democratic groups have invested millions in judicial campaigns in states with seats at stake. Meanwhile, conservative organizations, such as the Republican State Leadership Committee's Judicial Fairness Initiative, are financing campaigns for candidates who support abortion restrictions. These efforts reflect the high stakes of ideological control over state courts, with implications for future rulings on abortion.It's worth noting here how large the influence of Citizens United and the broader movement to bring more money into politics looms when these kinds of issues are kicked down to states. In some states, judicial candidates are selected through direct elections, making these races highly susceptible to political spending from advocacy groups with vested interests. Other states attempt to limit the injection of politics into judicial decisions by relying on appointments made by governors or legislatures. However, regardless of the selection process, campaign contributions are increasingly flowing into judicial races, raising concerns about the impartiality of the judiciary. With high-dollar donors on both sides of contentious issues like abortion, the rise in judicial campaign spending intensifies the ideological divides within state courts, potentially impacting how justices interpret and apply the law.Battles over abortion access fuel US state supreme court races | ReutersA Missouri jury ruled that Abbott and Reckitt's Mead Johnson unit are not liable for a young boy's severe intestinal disease, a case where the companies were accused of failing to warn about risks associated with formulas for premature infants. This verdict is a win for Abbott and Reckitt following substantial losses in earlier, similar trials, which had resulted in multimillion-dollar awards against them. As a result, Reckitt's shares rose sharply, with investors seeing reduced risk for future liability costs. The plaintiff, Kaine Whitfield, developed necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), a serious intestinal disease affecting premature infants, after receiving formula at a hospital. His family's lawsuit sought over $6 billion, arguing that the companies should have warned of potential risks. However, Abbott and Mead Johnson defended the safety of their products, citing the lack of scientific evidence directly linking formula to NEC and noting that hospitals incorporate widely known benefits of human milk into neonatal care practices. This trial is part of around 1,000 similar lawsuits across the U.S., and medical experts have expressed concern that such litigation could limit formula availability or impact medical decisions. Previous cases resulted in large verdicts against the companies, but recent support from regulatory bodies and scientists could strengthen Abbott and Mead Johnson's position in ongoing and future cases.Abbott and Reckitt unit secure win in infant formula trial | ReutersThe rapid growth of the private credit market, now valued at $2 trillion, is creating increased demand for U.S. finance lawyers. Private credit, which involves loans from non-bank lenders, has expanded significantly due to fewer regulatory restrictions than traditional bank lending. This has led major law firms, such as Mayer Brown, Kirkland & Ellis, and Paul Hastings, to hire specialized attorneys to capitalize on the market's rise. For example, Mayer Brown recently appointed Sheel Patel to lead its private credit practice, while Kirkland brought on H.T. Flanagan, whose clients include prominent investment firms like Hayfin and CPPIB.Traditional banks are also entering the space, often by forming partnerships with investment firms to tap into private credit opportunities. These collaborations, such as Citigroup's $25 billion private credit program with Apollo, leverage banks' relationships to generate new transactions. Legal work is further expanding as private credit diversifies into asset-based financing, exemplified by an $850 million financing deal involving music rights. The surge in private credit work has driven law firms to establish dedicated private credit practices, including Gibson Dunn, Akin Gump, and others, with an increase in partner moves seen this year. This trend reflects the high value of private credit for law firms, positioning them for more lucrative deals and consistent legal work in a rapidly evolving finance sector.Law firms ride private credit wave as market evolves | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Johann Sebastian Bach.This week's closing theme is Johann Sebastian Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor, a thrilling and dramatic piece that perfectly captures the eerie spirit of the Halloween season. Known for its powerful opening chords and haunting, descending melodies, this iconic work by Bach has become synonymous with all things spooky. Originally composed for the organ in the early 1700s, *Toccata and Fugue in D Minor* has an unmistakable dark grandeur that makes it a Halloween favorite across the world.The piece begins with a bold, almost theatrical flair, setting an ominous tone before weaving into intricate passages that create an atmosphere of suspense and mystery. Bach's masterful use of the organ's range and dynamics pulls listeners into a world of gothic beauty and intensity, making this work as timeless as it is chilling. As the Toccata and Fugue builds and resolves, it reminds us why Bach remains one of classical music's greatest storytellers. Let this piece bring a bit of that Halloween spirit into your weekend!Without further ado, Johann Sebastian Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor. Enjoy! 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

This Day in Legal History: Nineteenth Amendment AdoptedOn August 26, 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was officially adopted, marking a pivotal moment in American history by granting women the right to vote. The Amendment, which states that the right to vote "shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex," was the culmination of decades of activism and struggle by women's suffrage advocates. Pioneers like Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and many others fought tirelessly for this fundamental right, organizing rallies, petitions, and civil disobedience.The Amendment's adoption followed a lengthy ratification process, where Tennessee became the crucial 36th state to ratify the amendment, securing the necessary three-fourths majority. This victory did not come easily; it was the result of a concerted effort by suffragists who faced significant opposition. The Nineteenth Amendment not only expanded the electorate but also symbolized a broader movement toward gender equality in the United States. Its passage empowered women to engage fully in the democratic process and laid the groundwork for future advances in civil rights. The legacy of the Nineteenth Amendment continues to influence social and political movements to this day.Big Law firms are rallying behind Vice President Kamala Harris by hosting high-dollar fundraising events. Sullivan & Cromwell's Rodge Cohen is organizing a New York lunch featuring Doug Emhoff, with ticket prices reaching up to $100,000. In Washington, Jenner & Block's Josh Hsu is co-hosting an evening reception where tickets are nearly $7,000. Since Harris became the Democratic frontrunner, high-profile attorneys have been mobilizing to support her campaign, with several already raising substantial sums. Notably, Mayer Brown partner Phil Recht, a Harris supporter, notes strong momentum in campaign contributions. The host committees for these events include prominent figures from Big Law and the tech industry, such as Skadden's Nina Rose and OpenAI's Johanna Shelton. The fundraising effort has seen significant engagement, with many top lawyers eager to contribute. For example, Dawn Smalls of Jenner & Block raised $100,000 in just a week, and partners at firms like Gibson Dunn and WilmerHale are actively supporting Harris through events and donations.Big Law Throwing Kamala Fundraisers with a Six-Figure Ticket TierThe U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is set to challenge Kroger's $25 billion merger with rival Albertsons in federal court, arguing that the deal would harm consumers and workers by reducing competition. The FTC's case, part of the Biden administration's broader effort to address rising consumer prices, will focus on how the merger could lead to higher grocery prices and diminish the bargaining power of unionized workers, particularly in states like California and Washington where both chains have significant overlap. This trial marks a significant test for FTC Chair Lina Khan, who has prioritized using antitrust laws to protect workers, a shift from the traditional focus on consumer prices.Kroger and Albertsons argue that the merger is necessary to compete with large multinational retailers like Walmart, Costco, and Amazon. They propose selling 579 stores to mitigate competition concerns and promise to lower grocery prices by $1 billion post-merger. However, the FTC, supported by several states, contends that the merger would lead to store closures and weakened union leverage. The trial, expected to last around three weeks, will also examine whether the proposed buyer of the divested stores, C&S Wholesale Grocers, can successfully operate them.This case is significant as it builds on the FTC's recent focus on labor market competition, following other antitrust actions that have challenged the impact of mergers on workers, such as those in the college athletics and publishing industries. The outcome could pave the way for more scrutiny of mergers based on their effects on labor markets.US FTC's bid to block Kroger-Albertsons merger heads to trial | ReutersKroger case tests FTC Chair Khan's bid to protect workers | ReutersThe US Chamber of Commerce, a conservative business organization, is urging Congress to maintain the 21% corporate tax rate and extend key provisions of the 2017 Republican-led tax law. The Chamber argues that these measures will support sustained economic growth, aiming for at least 3% annually. As Congress prepares for a major tax code overhaul next year, the Chamber is actively lobbying to preserve lower international tax rates set to increase in 2025 and to reinstate certain deductions for research and development, interest expenses, and full asset expensing. While Republicans generally support extending parts of the 2017 law, despite concerns about the growing deficit, Democrats advocate for raising the corporate tax rate to 28% and increasing taxes on the wealthy to cover the law's costs. The University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School estimates that extending the law would only offset about 4.4% of its projected $4 trillion cost through economic growth.The US Chamber of Commerce is known for its conservative stance, particularly in advocating for pro-business policies and lower taxes. Historically, the Chamber has supported Republican initiatives and has often opposed regulatory measures that it views as detrimental to business interests.US Chamber to Ask Congress to Preserve 21% Corporate Tax RateCitgo Petroleum, originally founded in 1910 as Cities Service Company, became a significant player in the U.S. refining industry. In 1986, Venezuela's state-owned oil company, PDVSA, purchased a controlling stake in Citgo, integrating it into Venezuela's oil export strategy. Citgo operates as a major U.S. refiner with its headquarters in Houston, Texas.Currently, Citgo is at the center of a complex legal battle in the U.S. stemming from Venezuela's expropriations and debt defaults. A U.S. federal court officer, Robert Pincus, is overseeing an auction of shares in Citgo's parent company, PDV Holding, to satisfy up to $21.3 billion in claims. These claims have resulted from international arbitration awards and issues surrounding foreign sovereign immunity, making the case particularly complex.The auction process, ongoing since 2017, has faced multiple delays due to the complexity of the bids and the unprecedented legal context. The latest extension request, the third this year, would push the deadline to September 16 for Pincus to recommend a winning bid. The leading bidders are CVR Energy, supported by investor Carl Icahn, and an investment group led by Gold Reserve, a mining company. Following the recommendation, there will be a 21-day period for objections before a final sales hearing on November 7.US court officer requests new extension to select winner of Citgo auction | 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

This week's podcast is a special presentation of our recent webinar following the Supreme Court's recent decision in Grants Pass v. Johnson, moderated by Free Cities Center director Steven Greenhut. Go inside the historic decision with Theane Evangelis, partner with Gibson Dunn who represented Grants Pass before the Supreme Court and Erik Jaffe, PRI adjunct fellow in legal studies and partner with Schaerr | Jaffe who authored PRI's amicus brief in the case. PRI senior fellow in business and economics Dr. Wayne Winegarden discusses what cities and counties can now do to address homelessness in their communities following the ruling. PRI board member The Hon. Dan Kolkey gives opening remarks.

This Day in Legal History: Sherman Antitrust ActOn July 2, 1890, U.S. President Benjamin Harrison signed the Sherman Antitrust Act into law, marking a transformative moment in American economic history. This landmark legislation aimed to prohibit the formation of trusts and monopolies that restricted trade across states, fundamentally altering the landscape of American industry. Named after Senator John Sherman, the act sought to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers.The Sherman Antitrust Act was a response to growing public concern over the power and influence of large corporations, which often stifled competition and controlled vast market shares. Notable entities affected by this law included John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil and the Bell System of telecommunications. Standard Oil, once a dominant force in the oil industry, was dismantled into smaller companies in 1911, following a landmark Supreme Court decision that found it in violation of the act.Similarly, the Bell System, which had monopolized the telecommunications industry, was broken up in 1982, leading to the creation of several independent companies. The Sherman Antitrust Act thus paved the way for more robust enforcement of antitrust laws and inspired future legislation, such as the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914.The act's passage represented a significant shift toward greater governmental regulation of the economy, aiming to protect consumers and ensure a level playing field for businesses. Over the years, it has served as a critical tool for the U.S. Department of Justice in pursuing antitrust cases. The Sherman Antitrust Act remains a cornerstone of American antitrust policy, highlighting the ongoing importance of regulating corporate power to maintain market integrity.The transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy and new technology is providing a significant boost to private equity fundraising, benefiting law firms specializing in these areas. Investors have raised $17.4 billion for energy transition projects by June, surpassing last year's total of $10.3 billion, according to Preqin. This surge is driven by tax incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act, public demand for climate change solutions, and advancements in technologies like carbon capture.Prominent law firms, such as Davis Polk & Wardwell, Gibson Dunn, and Vinson & Elkins, are seeing increased activity due to the growing interest in energy transition investments. Michael Piazza of Gibson Dunn noted that despite the rise in renewable energy investments, continued investment in oil and gas remains necessary to support the energy transition responsibly.Major funds include Brookfield Asset Management's $10 billion fund announced in February and Morgan Stanley's plan to raise at least $1 billion. Firms like Blackstone, TPG, and KKR are also dedicating substantial resources to energy transition projects.While private equity fundraising has generally been sluggish, the energy transition sector stands out. Last year, private equity aggregate capital reached its lowest level since 2018, dropping over 8%. Limited partners are holding onto portfolio companies longer due to fewer exits via IPOs and secondary sales, complicating fundraising efforts.Law firms with expertise in private credit, fund formation, and energy deals are capitalizing on this trend. Firms such as Latham & Watkins and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett have been instrumental in advising on significant private credit loans and fund formations. The demand for legal services in energy transition has prompted firms like Paul Hastings and Sidley Austin to invest in hiring specialists in private credit and finance.Overall, the focus on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives has further fueled the energy transition boom, as limited partnerships increasingly include ESG criteria in their investment mandates. This shift provides incentives for investors to choose funds dedicated to climate technology and ESG projects over traditional private equity investments.Energy Transition Boom Aids Lawyers During Private Equity SlumpRudy Giuliani has requested to convert his Chapter 11 bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 liquidation. If approved by Judge Sean H. Lane of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, a trustee will manage Giuliani's estate and liquidate his assets to pay off his creditors, including a $148 million defamation judgment owed to two Georgia election workers.Creditors had previously called for a trustee, alleging that Giuliani had delayed financial disclosures and moved assets out of their reach. Giuliani's lawyers denied any dishonesty, stating he was correcting past financial mismanagement. The motion to convert the bankruptcy was filed as a one-page document, indicating Giuliani's decision to pursue this legal option against what his spokesperson described as a "partisan and politically motivated proceeding."Judge Lane has expressed frustration over the slow progress of Giuliani's bankruptcy case, noting Giuliani's focus on appealing the defamation judgment. Giuliani filed for Chapter 11 in December following the defamation ruling. His legal team is from Berger, Fischoff, Shumer, Wexler & Goodman LLP, while the committee of unsecured creditors is represented by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.Giuliani Moves to Liquidate Assets to Pay $148 Million Debt (1)Donald Trump is seeking to overturn his New York hush-money conviction following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that grants him some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken while president. Trump's lawyers have taken initial steps to request that the New York judge, Juan Merchan, set aside the jury's verdict, and propose delaying his sentencing to allow for briefing and arguments.The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision earlier stated that former presidents have immunity from prosecution for many official acts, reversing lower-court rulings and potentially influencing Trump's New York case. While two judges previously rejected Trump's immunity claims before this ruling, the decision could impact other legal proceedings against him.Trump's conviction involves 34 counts of falsifying business records related to payments made by his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to adult-film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election. Prosecutors argued Trump reimbursed Cohen with payments falsely recorded as legal services. Despite Trump's defense, the jury found the payments were intended to silence Daniels about an affair, not for legitimate legal work.The Supreme Court ruling could also affect other cases against Trump, including federal charges related to the 2020 election and classified documents. The legal landscape for Trump remains complex and dynamic as he navigates multiple legal challenges.Trump Seeks to Toss NY Felony Conviction After Immunity Win (1)The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision on presidential immunity leaves Judge Tanya Chutkan with the challenging task of determining the extent of immunity Donald Trump has in his federal criminal case related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. The Court's 6-3 ruling affirmed that Trump has broad protection from prosecution for actions within his official duties as president. Judge Chutkan must now assess which actions fall under this protection and which do not, significantly impacting the four-count indictment brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.This complex evaluation includes analyzing Trump's public statements before the January 6 Capitol attack and his attempts to organize alternate electors. Additionally, Chutkan will decide if prosecutors can overcome the presumption of immunity regarding Trump's pressure on then-Vice President Mike Pence. The Supreme Court's ruling suggests these communications are considered official acts.The process will delay the trial, originally scheduled for March, potentially pushing it beyond the November 5 presidential election where Trump is the Republican candidate. Chutkan, known for her no-nonsense approach, has previously shown little tolerance for delays and has a history of imposing strict sentences on Capitol rioters. Trump's legal team plans to appeal any unfavorable rulings, which could further prolong proceedings.Chutkan's previous ruling in December 2023 rejected Trump's broad immunity claims, but the new Supreme Court guidelines require her to reassess this stance. Additionally, a separate Supreme Court decision last week raised the bar for federal obstruction charges, directly affecting two of the four counts against Trump. The outcome of these legal challenges will set a significant precedent for future presidential immunity cases.US Supreme Court leaves Judge Tanya Chutkan to parse Trump immunity | 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

NCLA has filed a joint opening brief in National Center for Public Policy Research v. SEC, urging the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down new SEC rules requiring extensive climate-related disclosures by public companies. This challenge is combined with U.S. Chamber of Commerce v. SEC, where Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP represents the petitioners. NCLA represents the National Center for Public Policy Research alongside the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Texas Association of Business, and Longview Chamber of Commerce, arguing against the SEC's unconstitutional push for climate activism at the expense of civil liberties. Mark, Jenin, and Senior Litigation Counsel Andrew Morris discuss the case in their latest episode.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this epidose of "Movers, Shakers & Rainmakers," David Lat and Zach Sandberg discuss the newly released 2024 Vault Rankings. How are the Vault rankings formulated? Who moved up? Who dropped down? And why? For the Move of the Week, David discusses Norton Rose's hiring of a 12 attorney team from Bryan Cave, while Zach analyzes Mayer Brown's addition of Gabrielle Levin from Gibson Dunn to co-lead their Employment Litigation & Counseling practice.

Farrah Pepper is the Chief Legal Innovation Counsel (CLIC) at Marsh McLennan, where she makes things…click. Farrah founded and leads the company's Legal Innovation & Technology (LIT) team, which includes the LIT innovation lab and the legal data discovery program. Farrah has a long history of building and leading in-house and law firm teams to solve business challenges, create enterprise value and reduce risk. Previously, Farrah was GE's global discovery counsel, where she served as the large, diverse conglomerate's first dedicated legal expert on discovery strategy and policy. Farrah created and led the GE Discovery Center of Excellence and reinvented GE's approach to global discovery and data management to drive dramatic savings, efficiencies and risk reduction. Prior to joining GE, Farrah was a litigator in the New York office of Gibson Dunn, where she was a founder and leader of the firm's global electronic discovery practice group. Recent accolades for Farrah include being named a Thought Leader by Corporate Counsel (Women, Influence & Power), a Women of Legal Tech inductee by the ABA's LTRC (Legal Technology Research Center), a member of the Legal 500 GC Powerlist (US), and a fellow in the College of Law Practice Management. Farrah is a lifelong New Yorker and double-NYU grad: NYU College of Arts & Science (B.A., summa cum laude) and NYU School of Law (J.D.).   In episode 24 of Careers in the Business of Law: Legal Tech Innovators Series, David Cowen chats with Farrah Pepper about her dynamic career journey from Gibson Dunn to GE and Marsh McLennan. Farrah shares her insights on negotiating for the roles you truly want, the evolution of legal innovation, and the importance of being a "Swiss Army knife" in the corporate world. She also delves into the collaborative spirit of the LDI community and the emerging roles in the legal industry, highlighting the need for creativity, empathy, and a forward-thinking mindset. Farrah's engaging storytelling and vibrant personality make this episode a must-listen for anyone interested in the intersection of law and technology. (00:08) - Meet Farrah Pepper. David Cowen introduces Farrah Pepper as a dynamo, smart, kind, and humorous. Farrah responds with gratitude, joking about having David as her hype man. (01:59) - Farrah's Journey. David highlights Farrah's impressive career, noting her roles at Gibson Dunn, GE, and Marsh McLennan. Farrah shares insights on how careers and companies have evolved, pointing out the importance of conversations over negotiations. (03:21) - The Innovation Pitch. Farrah recounts how she pitched an innovation-based role at Marsh McLennan, moving beyond her previous e-discovery role at GE. She highlights the value of being a "Swiss Army knife" in solving corporate problems. (07:19) - Riding the Waves Together. Farrah uses a surfing metaphor to describe the collaborative nature of the LDI community, highlighting the shared vision and collective effort of its members to ride the waves of change in the legal industry. (12:14) - Legal Data Intelligence Origin Story. Farrah discusses the community-driven nature of LDI and gives props to Omar from Relativity for galvanizing the project. She points out LDI's focus on broad community involvement and its resources, including job descriptions and use cases. (16:20) - Emerging Roles in Legal. David and Farrah discuss new and evolving roles in the legal industry, such as legal chief of staff, legal chief operating officer, and legal data intelligence officer. Farrah shares her excitement about these opportunities and the creative potential they hold. (22:19) - Farrah's Musical Inspiration. Farrah reveals that her house is filled with Taylor Swift and Broadway music, sharing how Taylor Swift's "I Can See You With a Broken Heart" resonates with her and other legal professionals.   Mentions: Farrah Pepper: LinkedIn Gibson Dunn: Website GE: Website Marsh McLennan: Website Relativity: Website LDI (Legal Data Intelligence): Website Laura Kibbe: LinkedIn Nirav Shah from Home Depot: LinkedIn Adam Rouse: LinkedIn Jeff Salling: LinkedIn CLOC (Corporate Legal Operations Consortium): Website ILTA (International Legal Technology Association): Website Solid Atlanta: Website Outro Song: I Can See You With a Broken Heart

Selina Sagayam is an English-qualified senior counsel and recent former partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's London office. She is a pioneer and leader in the firm's Environmental, Sustainability, and Governance (ESG) practice and a member of its international corporate group. Selina is a woman in a man's world. She has not just won awards as a woman but as a leader in her field. She is recognised by The Legal 500 UK 2024 for Private Equity: Transactions and M&A: Upper Mid-Market and Premium Deals over £750 million. Selina has also been listed by Brummell Magazine in 2020 as an Inspirational Woman City Leader, to name a few of her accolades.   CONNECT WITH SELINA: ⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠ ⁠The Renewables Infrastructure Group⁠ ⁠Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher⁠     CONNECT WITH CAROLINE: Our club ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ gives you real-life stories and examples of how our club professionals can guide you on ‘How to Keep Your Money' ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Caroline's Club⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ caroline@carolines.club

To celebrate Asian American & Pacific Islander Heritage Month, Reorg's Harvard Zhang leads a panel discussion with Larry Wee a partner at Milbank, Jingzhi Dai ‘JD', a managing director at Jefferies, Alex Xiao, an associate at Gibson Dunn and David Samikkannu, a director at AlixPartners speak, where they discuss why they set up a networking group called Restructuring Asians in New York, or RAINY, how they got to where they are professionally, and what can be done to advance the careers of minorities. Those that identify as AAPI in the leveraged finance, distressed debt and restructuring industries and are interested in joining RAINY can find the private group HERE on LinkedIn. And, as always, we bring you our weekly summary of interesting developments in the restructuring world as well as a preview of what's on tap for next week. We're looking for feedback to improve the podcast experience! Please share your thoughts here: www.research.net/r/Reorg_podcast_survey For more information on our latest events and webinars: reorg.com/resources/events-and-webinars/ Sign up to our weekly newsletter Reorg on the Record: reorg.com/resources/reorg-on-the-record/

This Day in Legal History: First Union FormedOn May 1, 1794, a pivotal development in labor rights history occurred in Philadelphia with the formation of the Federal Society of Journeymen Cordwainers. This organization, consisting of skilled shoemakers, marks the establishment of the first trade union in the United States. The union was created as a response to the increasingly difficult economic conditions that tradesmen faced, including low wages and long working hours.The Cordwainers, recognizing the strength in numbers, aimed to leverage their collective bargaining power to negotiate better wages and working conditions. This was a significant step forward in the labor movement, as it introduced the concept of organized labor in America. The formation of this union was not just about improving pay; it was also about dignifying the labor force and providing workers a platform to voice their concerns.Philadelphia, being a hub of commerce and trade in the late 18th century, provided the perfect setting for such an organization. The city's workshops and bustling markets meant that there was a significant demand for skilled labor, which the Cordwainers could supply. However, with industrialization beginning to take root, these skilled workers found themselves under threat from cheaper, mass-produced goods.The Federal Society of Journeymen Cordwainers set a precedent that would be followed by other trades across the country. Their actions led to the establishment of similar societies and unions, which eventually contributed to the broader national labor movement. The Cordwainers themselves faced legal challenges, particularly in 1806, when they were involved in a landmark legal case concerning the rights of workers to organize, known as Commonwealth v. Pullis. In this case, the court ruled against the union, marking one of the first legal battles over the legitimacy of trade union activities in the United States.Despite the legal setbacks, the resilience and pioneering spirit of the Federal Society of Journeymen Cordwainers inspired subsequent generations of workers to fight for their rights. Their legacy is a testament to the enduring struggle for fair labor practices and workers' rights. This day in legal history not only marks the formation of America's first trade union but also celebrates the long journey towards justice and equity in the workplace.The US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) recently proposed a rule that would require pharmaceutical companies to submit unredacted settlement agreements involving patent challenges to a new repository. This rule is aimed to assist the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) in detecting antitrust violations. The proposal arose from concerns that these settlements, often reached in administrative tribunals like the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), could be used to delay cheaper biosimilar drugs from entering the market.Evan Diamond, special counsel, noted that the PTO has not clearly defined "good cause" for accessing these agreements, which might increase third-party access and create confidentiality concerns. The fear is that the database could enable federal agencies to easily assess the frequency of potentially anticompetitive pay-for-delay settlements—a practice scrutinized under the Supreme Court's 2013 decision in FTC v. Actavis, which ruled such deals could be illegal.The proposal aligns with an executive order from President Joe Biden encouraging interagency cooperation to prevent practices that unjustifiably delay generic and biosimilar competition. This move has heightened the pharmaceutical industry's fears of increased antitrust enforcement, particularly as the FTC has been actively challenging questionable patent listings that could hinder the approval of generic drugs.Agencies like the FTC and DOJ already have certain reporting requirements under the Medicare Modernization Act for pharmaceutical companies, but the PTO's rule could capture additional agreements that do not meet existing criteria. This has sparked debate over the necessity and potential overlap of the new rule.The pharmaceutical industry, represented by major lobbyist groups like Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and the Biotechnology Innovation Organization, has expressed strong opposition, citing concerns over the scope of PTO's authority and the ambiguity around the "good cause" criterion.This development highlights a broader regulatory push against anti-competitive practices not only in pharmaceuticals but also in other sectors like technology, where companies like Apple and Google are frequently involved in patent litigation.In summary, the PTO's proposed rule could significantly impact how pharmaceutical settlements are handled, potentially exposing companies to greater antitrust scrutiny. This measure reflects a governmental shift towards stricter oversight of patent practices to foster competition and reduce drug prices.Drug Makers Exposed to Antitrust Probes if Patent Cache AdoptedThis term, Jones Day had the highest number of attorneys—five in total—arguing cases at the U.S. Supreme Court, more than any other firm. Among them, John Gore and C. Kevin Marshall presented for the first time at the high court. Other experienced attorneys like former U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco, and partners Hashim Mooppan and Traci Lovitt also argued cases, contributing to the firm's visibility.In comparison, other leading law firms such as Gibson Dunn, Hogan Lovells, and Williams & Connolly had slightly fewer representatives. Gibson Dunn introduced three new attorneys to the Supreme Court lectern, including Theane Evangelis, D. Nick Harper, and Eugene Scalia, who is a son of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Hogan Lovells' Jessica Ellsworth argued for the first time, including in a significant case regarding the abortion drug mifepristone. Williams & Connolly had Lisa Blatt argue all four of their cases, marking her 50th Supreme Court appearance.Overall, the season saw a mix of seasoned veterans and newcomers. Of the total 152 arguments made, over half were by attorneys who had appeared at least five times before, while a quarter were by first-time arguers. This highlights both the depth of experience and the ongoing introduction of new talent in the legal field's highest echelons.Jones Day Leads in Supreme Court Arguments With New FacesJohnson & Johnson (J&J) is currently seeking approval for an $11 billion settlement to resolve ongoing litigation concerning its talc-based baby powder, which has been alleged to cause ovarian cancer. This amount is a significant increase from a previous offer of $8.9 billion. J&J's strategy involves a third attempt at a bankruptcy filing, specifically a pre-packaged bankruptcy, which allows for faster processing if they secure enough creditor support—in this case, needing the approval of 75% of the talc plaintiffs.The company proposes to pay $6.48 billion over 25 years to settle ovarian cancer claims, but it has not specified how funds will be divided between existing and future claims. Additionally, J&J has nearly settled all claims regarding mesothelioma believed to be caused by asbestos in the powder. This settlement approach follows multiple failed attempts to use Chapter 11 to manage these lawsuits, which now number almost 60,000.These lawsuits have been a significant factor depressing J&J's stock price, according to analysts. Despite the legal challenges, J&J maintains that its talc products do not cause cancer and asserts that it has marketed its baby powder responsibly for over a century. A recent verdict, however, led to a $45 million payout to a family, implicating J&J and its spinoff Kenvue in the ongoing litigation.The company's persistence in seeking a bankruptcy-based settlement reflects its strategic approach to managing a complex legal challenge that impacts thousands of plaintiffs and could potentially set a precedent in how large corporations handle mass tort liabilities through bankruptcy court.J&J Seeks Backing for $11 Billion Baby Powder Cancer SettlementIn President Joe Biden's Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Proposal, a notable change is the suggestion to tax unrealized gains—value increases in assets not yet converted into cash through a sale. This marks a significant shift from traditional tax frameworks, which typically avoid taxing unrealized gains due to their complexity, potential liquidity issues, and difficulties in implementation.The rationale behind this proposal is to ensure tax fairness by capturing increases in wealth that currently escape taxation. For example, if a billionaire's stock appreciates significantly without being sold, they realize no taxable gain. However, if they borrow against these increased values, they effectively use this appreciation as a means to generate wealth without incurring tax liabilities. This situation presents a loophole where wealth can grow and be leveraged without contributing to the tax base.The FY2025 budget aims to address these disparities by proposing a tax on unrealized gains for very high-net-worth individuals and entities that have not been subject to a tax event in the last 90 years. This approach seeks to broaden the tax base without raising rates, aiming to increase tax revenue from the wealthy without additional burdens on middle and lower-income individuals.This policy shift acknowledges the need to adapt tax strategies to a changing economic environment where traditional taxation methods no longer capture all forms of wealth accumulation. The proposal suggests that a more equitable tax system requires taxing wealth as it grows, even if it is not realized through a sale. By proposing to tax unrealized gains, the administration intends to correct imbalances allowing substantial wealth to accumulate tax-free, signaling a significant potential change in how wealth is taxed in the U.S.Unrealized Gain Tax—A Coming Sea Change in FY2025 Budget Proposal? Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Additional links: Click here to read George Hazel's full profile and bio on Gibson Dunn's websiteListen and subscribe to George Hazel's podcast “A View from the Bench” on Apple Podcasts. ABOUT THE HOSTJudge Paul W. Grimm (ret.) is the David F. Levi Professor of the Practice of Law and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute at Duke Law School. From December 2012 until his retirement in December 2022, he served as a district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, with chambers in Greenbelt, Maryland. Click here to read his full bio.

The Ozempic effect is coming for more than just your wardrobe! Last week, 9fin reported that a group of lenders to Weight Watchers parent WW International organized with law firm Gibson Dunn as the company loses subscribers to weight loss drugs. On a somewhat related note, 9fin also reported that Herbalife is facing challenges of its own after a bad set of earnings. What use are health shakes when you can take a pill to slim down? Listen as our US deputy distressed editor Rachel Butt and senior reporter William Hoffman talk about these stories, and how Oprah Winfrey is at the center of it all. 

Vince speaks with Tom Dupree, Partner at Gibson Dunn and Former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General about Judge McAfree dropping 6 charges of Fani Willis' “RICO” case against Trump and his top line takeaways from Robert Hur's testimony.         For more coverage on the issues that matter to you visit www.WMAL.com, download the WMAL app or tune in live on WMAL-FM 105.9 from 3-6pm.   To join the conversation, check us out on social media: @WMAL @VinceCoglianese.      Executive Producer: Corey Inganamort @TheBirdWords See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3/13/24 Hour 3      Adam Schiff continues to claim that Robert Hur acted inappropriately. Biden plans to increase the national debt to 43 trillion dollars if he gets reelected. The RNC is cleaning house after Michael Whatley and Lara Trump have been elected co-chairs. Vince speaks with Tom Dupree, Partner at Gibson Dunn and Former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General about Judge McAfree dropping 6 charges of Fani Willis' “RICO” case against Trump and his top line takeaways from Robert Hur's testimony.         For more coverage on the issues that matter to you visit www.WMAL.com, download the WMAL app or tune in live on WMAL-FM 105.9 from 3-6pm.     To join the conversation, check us out on social media: @WMAL @VinceCoglianese.      Executive Producer: Corey Inganamort @TheBirdWords See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The U.S. antitrust agencies have recently proposed changes to the HSR merger filing process, broadening the scope of review beyond consumer and competitive effects to workers and other non-competition factors. Merging parties would also be required to prepare written responses to questions related to the transaction, bringing the U.S. more into line with filing requirements in certain foreign merger control regimes like the EU. The additional volume and scope of information contained in merging parties' HSR filings would also allow the antitrust agencies to potentially apply more rigorous scrutiny of proposed transactions at an earlier stage because the information provided likely will take considerable time for the agency to review. This panel will discuss how in-house counsel is navigating these changes.Featuring:Kirstie Nicholson, Global Competition Counsel, BHPGil Ohana, former Senior Director, Antitrust & Competition, CiscoRoman Reuter, Senior Counsel, International Competition Affairs, Deutsche Telekom AGModerator: Chris Wilson, Partner, Gibson Dunn

Bust out your sunglasses! Miriam and Kristi are live in Los Angeles, hosted by Gibson Dunn. This episode contains the full event recording.

As digital communications become more advanced and complicated, protecting confidential information and documents also becomes a more complex process to accomplish. In this in-house fundamentals episode, litigation partner Diana Feinstein of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher breaks down what you need to know to protect the attorney-client privilege in your in-house Legal Department. She shares concrete tips on setting up the stage for confidential communications, especially when outside counsel is directly involved.

Elizabeth Papez talked about the influence of Chief Justice John Roberts and other high-profile chief justices on the direction of the Supreme Court as well as American life. Ms. Papez is a litigator and partner in the firm of Gibson Dunn who previously clerked for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and served as deputy assistant attorney general during the George W. Bush administration.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Elizabeth Papez talked about the influence of Chief Justice John Roberts and other high-profile chief justices on the direction of the Supreme Court as well as American life. Ms. Papez is a litigator and partner in the firm of Gibson Dunn who previously clerked for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and served as deputy assistant attorney general during the George W. Bush administration.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What is the European Convention on Human Rights, how does it impact what the UK government can do and what would the ramifications be if the UK left it?Joining David Aaronovitch in The Briefing Room:Dr. Ed Bates, Associate Professor, University of Leicester School of Law. Author of The Evolution of the European Convention on Human Rights. Robert Spano, Partner at Gibson Dunn, Former President of the European Court of Human Rights. Dr Joelle Grogan, Head of Research, UK in a Changing Europe. Tom Hickman, Professor of Public Law, University College London.Production: Ben Carter, Kirsteen Knight and Diane Richardson Production co-ordinator: Sabine Schereck Sound: Graham Puddifoot Editor: Richard Vadon

Carrie LeRoy and Charles Walker of the lawfirm Gibson Dunn discuss key takeaways from a bulletin they published on the Gibson Dunn website titled M&A Report: Top Technology Sector-Specific Legal Diligence Concerns in Acquisitions. They discussed the pitfalls that exist for technology acquisitions from intellectual property ownership to cyber security to bribery and corruption risks from third parties. Below is a link to the bulletin as well as links to their bios on the Gibson Dunn website to get in touch.Gibson Dunn BulletinCarrie LeRoy BioCharles Walker Bio

And the Supreme Court's ethical problems just won't go away. Biglaw has always played follow-the-leader. Usually it's about bonuses, but Skadden is taking a big gamble that the rest of the industry will follow it back to a Monday-Thursday office work week. If the rest of Biglaw doesn't follow suit, the giant sucking sound you hear will be Skadden talent lateraling to rival firms. Also the Supreme Court's ethical follies continued with John Roberts teasing a secret plan to cure its ethical woes, while Gibson Dunn took a turn as legal industry laughing stock with a shoddily researched letter on behalf of Harlan Crow. And the Court sided with a grandmother after the county stole $25,000 from her... but dig a little deeper and her case wasn't as sympathetic as it looked.

And the Supreme Court's ethical problems just won't go away. Biglaw has always played follow-the-leader. Usually it's about bonuses, but Skadden is taking a big gamble that the rest of the industry will follow it back to a Monday-Thursday office work week. If the rest of Biglaw doesn't follow suit, the giant sucking sound you hear will be Skadden talent lateraling to rival firms. Also the Supreme Court's ethical follies continued with John Roberts teasing a secret plan to cure its ethical woes, while Gibson Dunn took a turn as legal industry laughing stock with a shoddily researched letter on behalf of Harlan Crow. And the Court sided with a grandmother after the county stole $25,000 from her... but dig a little deeper and her case wasn't as sympathetic as it looked.

Liz and Andrew update you on a bunch of stories, including today's breaking news regarding the sentencing of Stewart Rhodes and the Texas Legislature committee referring out articles of impeachment for AG Ken Paxton. Notes OA 693 https://openargs.com/oa693-mike-pence-cant-testify-against-trump-cause-hes-a-senator-now/ OA 698 https://openargs.com/oa698-will-clarence-thomas-break-the-internet-probably-not/ OA 723 https://openargs.com/oa723-right-wing-judges-take-the-money-and-run-away-with-your-civil-rights/ OA 746 https://openargs.com/oa746-derp-off-dersh-off-2-sidney-powell-vs-kari-lake/ Investigators detail years of alleged misconduct by Texas AG Ken Paxton in stunning House committee hearing https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/24/ken-paxton-abuse-power-house-investigation-texas/ Kari Lake ruling https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/CV2022-095403-926-05222023-PDF.pdf Kari Lake War Room tweet 5/23 tweet https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1661095473695035392?s=20 May 8 Senate Judiciary Letter to Harlan Crow https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/May%208,%202023%20letter%20to%20Harlan%20Crow16.pdf  May 22 letter from Gibson Dunn to Durbin re Harlan Crow https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23822175/crow-letter.pdf 5 U.S.C. § 13103 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/13103 -Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law -Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs -Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ -For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki -And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com

“A More Perfect Union" Hour 1 with Nii-Quartelai Quartey | @drniiquartelai| Podcast Hosted by changemaker, journalist, educator, and KBLA Talk 1580 Chief National Political Analyst Dr. Nii-Quartelai Quartey, “A More Perfect Union” promises to deliver national news of consequence, informed opinion, and analysis beyond the headlines. Listen to my conversation with Plaintiff and peaceful protestor Deon Jones. In the first verdict of its kind since mass protests swept Los Angeles in 2020, a federal jury found an LAPD officer personally liable for shooting Deon in the face— awarding him $375,000. Listen to Deon and his lawyer Orin Snyder of Gibson Dunn make the case for what this verdict might mean for nationwide police reform.

Jennifer Schulp is the Director of Financial Regulation Studies at Cato Institute's Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, where she focuses on the regulation of securities and capital markets. She has testified before Congress multiple times, including before the US Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, the US House Committee on Financial Services, and the Committee on House administration. Prior to joining Cato, Jennifer was a director in the Department of Enforcement at the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) where she represented FINRA in investigations and disciplinary proceedings relating to violations of the Federal Securities Laws [00:02:00] and Self-regulatory Organization rules. Before that, Jennifer worked as a lawyer in private practice at Gibson Dunn and Crutcher, LLP, and clerked for Judge E Grady Jolly of the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Jennifer received her JD from the University of Chicago Law School. She holds an AB in political science from the University of Chicago. PODCAST INFO Podcast website: https://podcast.pgpforcrypto.org Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pgp*-pretty-good-policy-for-crypto-podcast/id1669504720 RSS: https://feed.pod.co/pgp-for-crypto-podcast HOST INFO Gary Weinstein's Twitter: https://twitter.com/Gary_Weinstein_ Gary Weinstein's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/garyweinstein/ Paul Brigner's Twitter: https://twitter.com/paulbrigner Paul Brigner's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulbrigner/ Electric Coin Co. Website: https://electriccoin.co Electric Coin Co. Twitter: https://twitter.com/ElectricCoinCo EPISODE LINKS Jennifer's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jennifer-schulp-3696161/ Jennifer's Twitter: https://twitter.com/jenniferjschulp Cato Institute: https://www.cato.org/ Cato Institute's Twitter: https://twitter.com/catoinstitute TIMESTAMPS 00:00 Welcome 01:12 Introduction and Celebrating International Women's Day 02:55 Overview of Crypto Regulatory Environment and the SEC 12:52 The SEC's Role in Regulating the Industry and Defining Decentralization 18:28 The Dangerous Situation of Crypto Projects and the Lack of Clear Pathways 22:21 The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 and Its Expansion over Time: A History of Constitutional Concerns 34:03 Addressing Financial Surveillance in the Absence of the BSA 38:11 The Impact of the Bank Secrecy Act on the Crypto Policy Environment 42:34 The Third Party Doctrine and Its Compatibility with Modern Life 47:08 Financial Privacy and the SEC's Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) 55:10 The Challenges of Establishing a Self-Regulatory Organization (SRO) in the Crypto Space 01:01:02 IRS Regulations and Financial Surveillance 01:05:36 The Risks, Questions, and Concerns, about a US Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) 01:11:52 The Role of Litigation in Shaping Crypto Regulations and Its Impact on Congress and Regulators 01:17:43 The Future of Cryptocurrencies and the Importance of Avoiding Regulatory Barriers 01:20:39 Concluding Thoughts and the Importance of Financial Privacy and Privacy Coins in Crypto DISCLAIMER Please be advised that the information provided in this podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and is not to be taken as legal or financial advice. The opinions and views expressed by our guests are their own and may not reflect the official stance of the organizations they represent or those of Electric Coin Co. Always consult a legal or financial professional before making any decisions.

Ron DeSantis wants to make open and slacken up national libel laws and, as always, it gets complicated. Sarah and (host emeritus) David try to help out. Also: Meta  gets sanctioned!Show Notes:-Advisory Opinions: The Problem with "History & Tradition"-Fl. Gov. DeSantis floats legislation that would make it easier to sue news outlets-Reuters: Sarah Palin's legal fight with NYT-4th Circuit panel grants Stein injunction against criminal charges-Reuters: Meta, law firm Gibson Dunn sanctioned in Facebook privacy case-DOJ says end of health emergency will terminate Title 42 policy and moot Supreme Court case-David French for NYT: Men Need More Purpose Than Respect

Jane Horvath joins Two Think Minimum to chat about privacy policy. She shares the serendipitous way she became a privacy expert in the early days at a technology start up. She also discusses the need for a baseline omnibus privacy law in the US. Jane recently became a partner at Gibson Dunn, where she is co-chair of the Privacy, Cybersecurity, and Data Innovation Practice Group. She built and led Apple's privacy legal team, most recently serving as Apple's Chief Privacy Officer. And before that, she worked in privacy for Google, the US Department of Justice, and Digital City.

Vince Coglianese speaks with Thomas Dupree, Partner at Gibson Dunn and Former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General about the latest developments in Biden's classified documents scandal.  For more coverage on the issues that matter to you visit www.WMAL.com, download the WMAL app or tune in live on WMAL-FM 105.9 from 3-6pm.   To join the conversation, check us out on social media: @WMAL @VinceCoglianese See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the second hour of The Vince Coglianese Show, Vince speaks with Thomas Dupree, Partner at Gibson Dunn and Former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General about the latest developments in Biden's classified documents scandal.  Vince speaks with Gordon Chang, Author of "The Coming Collapse of China, and The Great US-China Tech War" about Chinese outposts suspected of conducting police operations without jurisdiction within the USA. For more coverage on the issues that matter to you visit www.WMAL.com, download the WMAL app or tune in live on WMAL-FM 105.9 from 3-6pm.   To join the conversation, check us out on social media: @WMAL @VinceCoglianese See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court's upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases that will be covered are included below.Percoco v. United States (Nov. 28) - Criminal Law; whether a private citizen who can influence government decision-making owes a duty to the public, so that he can be convicted of bribery.Ciminelli v. United States (Nov. 28) - Criminal Law; whether a defendant can be convicted under the federal wire-fraud statute based on a “right to control” theory.United States v. Texas (Nov. 29) - Immigration; a challenge to the Biden administration's policy of prioritizing certain groups of unauthorized immigrants for arrest and detention.Wilkins v. United States (Nov. 30) - Property Rights, whether the 12-year statute of limitations to bring a lawsuit under the Quiet Title Act is jurisdictional and cannot be waived.303 Creative v. Elenis (Dec. 5) - Civil Rights; whether applying Colorado's public-accommodation law to require an artist to speak or stay silent violates the Constitution's free speech clause.MOAC Mall Holdings LLC v. Transform Holdco LLC (Dec. 5) - Bankruptcy; whether a provision of federal bankruptcy law limits the power of the courts of appeals over an order approving the sale of a debtor's assets.Bartenwerfer v. Buckley (Dec. 6) - Bankruptcy; whether a bankruptcy debtor can be held liable for another person's fraud.Moore v. Harper (Dec. 7) - Election Law; whether a state supreme court's order invalidating a state's congressional map and ordering the state to draw a new one violates the Constitution's elections clause.Featuring: -- Andrew Grossman, Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP; Adjunct Scholar, The Cato Institute-- Casey Mattox, Vice President for Legal and Judicial Strategy, Americans for Prosperity Network-- Prof. Ilya Somin, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University -- Moderator: Samuel D. Adkisson, Associate Attorney, Gibson Dunn

Welcome to Original Jurisdiction, the latest legal publication by me, David Lat. You can learn more about Original Jurisdiction by reading its About page, and you can email me at davidlat@substack.com. This is a reader-supported publication; you can subscribe by clicking on the button below. Thanks!Burying your own child is one of the most difficult experiences to endure. Burying your own child because he was murdered is even more horrific.Just ask Ruth Markel. She was the mother of my friend Dan Markel, the renowned professor of criminal law who was shot in his garage on the morning of July 18, 2014. At the time of his death, Dan was only 41, the father of two young boys. Now Ruth has written a powerful, deeply moving memoir about her life since that fateful day, The Unveiling: A Mother's Reflection on Murder, Grief, and Trial Life.I was honored to have Ruth as my guest on the Original Jurisdiction podcast. We discussed what the past eight years have been like for her, why she wrote The Unveiling, how she got Florida to pass a landmark law about grandparental rights, and the latest in the Markel case—not just the legal proceedings, which are far from over, but also her struggle to win access to her grandsons, whom she was not allowed to see for six years. You can listen to our conversation by clicking on the embed above.[UPDATE (11/17/2022, 3:35 a.m.): Yesterday brought big news in the case: after staying silent for the more than six years since her arrest, Katherine Magbanua, who served as the go-between connecting the Adelsons and hit men Sigfredo Garcia and Luis Rivera, has agreed to talk to the authorities. Here's the order from Judge Robert Wheeler providing for her transfer from prison to the Leon County State Attorney'ss Office for a proffer on or before November 28 to 30.]Show Notes:* Ruth Markel, author website* The Unveiling: A Mother's Reflection on Murder, Grief, and Trial Life, Amazon* Mom's quest to solve university professor's murder, by Brad Hunter for the Toronto Sun* How targeted murder of Dan Markel went down, by Brad Hunter for the Toronto Sun* Surviving A Son's Murder With Ruth Markel, Surviving the Survivor (podcast)Prefer reading to listening? A transcript of the entire episode appears below.Two quick notes:* This transcript has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter meaning—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning.* Because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email. To view the entire post, simply click on "View entire message" in your email app.David Lat: Hello, and welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to by visiting davidlat.substack.com.You're listening to the fifth episode of this podcast, recorded on Tuesday, November 8. My normal schedule is to post episodes every other Wednesday.My plan for this podcast is to have at least two categories of guests. The first consists of high-profile lawyers, like Alex Spiro, Paul Clement, and Robbie Kaplan. The second consists of individuals with expertise in topics that are important to me and my audience.One such topic is the 2014 murder of law professor Dan Markel. Dan was a friend of mine from college, when we worked together at the Harvard Crimson, and from the early days of legal blogging, when he founded PrawfsBlawg and I founded Above the Law. I have been following the quest to bring his killers to justice for more than eight years, here at Original Jurisdiction and at Above the Law before that.For my third podcast episode, I had as my guest Steven Epstein, author of Extreme Punishment: The Chilling True Story of Acclaimed Law Professor Dan Markel's Murder. For this latest episode, I'm honored to have as my guest Ruth Markel, who has the most personal connection of all to the case: Dan Markel was her son. And like Steve Epstein, Ruth is also the author of an important and acclaimed new book about the case, The Unveiling: A Mother's Reflection on Murder, Grief, and Trial Life. Ruth is a noted author, public speaker, and the president of RNM Enterprises, a leading management consulting firm. She has worked in senior management positions in both private and public sectors for the past forty years. The Unveiling is actually her tenth book; some of her earlier works include Moving Up: A Woman's Guide To A Better Future At Work, published by HarperCollins in 1988, and Room At The Top: A Woman's Guide To Moving Up In Business, published by Penguin in 1985. In connection with the Markel case, she has appeared on such prominent programs as 20/20, Inside Edition, and Dateline NBC.In our conversation, Ruth and I discussed what the eight years since the murder have been like for her; why she wrote The Unveiling; how she got Florida to pass the Markel Act, an important piece of legislation about grandparental rights; and the latest developments in terms of both the legal proceedings in the Markel case and her ability to see her two grandsons, who were cruelly kept from her for years after the murder.Without further ado, here's my interview of Ruth Markel.DL: First of all, Ruth, congratulations on the book, which I have read and I highly recommend, and condolences on both Dan's passing and the journey you have been on these past eight-plus years. I think one point that you make in the book repeatedly is that this type of situation is not one discrete loss, but it's a suffering that recurs again and again as you go through what you refer to as the “trial life.” So again, just my condolences and thank you for trying to seek justice for Dan's murderers and also getting legislation passed to help other grandparents.Ruth Markel: Thank you so much, David. I first of all have to thank you, a long and special thank-you, because I know you've written so much about Dan's murder, and I know that you knew him too. And whatever you've written is very accomplished and very thorough, and I appreciate your hands and eyes on the case, because we always need people who really know what's happening, rather than just reporting on separate incidents. So I really, really have a lot of gratitude to say to you—on the part of the family, it isn't just me, but it's all of us who want to thank you.DL: It's the least I can do. As I've written before, I knew Dan—I knew him from college, when we worked on the Harvard Crimson, and then we reconnected again as bloggers, when he founded the extremely successful PrawfsBlawg and I started Above the Law.One thing I wanted to ask you about—and I know you've talked about this in past interviews—many of us know Dan as a brilliant legal scholar, a prolific blogger, an academic, but what can you tell us about his childhood? What was he like growing up? I think some readers will be interested in hearing that maybe he wasn't what we [might have expected].RM: No, not at all. I think if anybody had any contradictions from their later life to their earlier life, that would be Dan Markel, the late Dan Markel. Danny was a bum when he was younger. He was Dennis the Menace at his core—very, very high-energy as a child. He never liked normal toys. His favorite objects at 18 months, two years, were a pail, a mop-and-pail type of thing, and a stepladder. And a stepladder was his favorite toy. When he was really young, he would go up on the kitchen counter not to look for cookies, like many kids go into the pantry, but [for] the challenge of climbing it up and climbing it down, and so forth.We lived in Montreal. First, we're Canadian. Many people don't even know that we're Canadian, that Dan was Canadian. And there's a lot of places that write that he was born in Toronto, but that's not true—he was born in Montreal. We lived there until he started school, kindergarten, when he was five, and then moved to Toronto.And he was still [unfocused] in the first few years of school, even until eight, nine years old. The funny story is the school had an aptitude test in grade three, and they called me and they said he had the highest score in the school—not only the highest score in the school, but the highest score that [they] ever saw from this aptitude test. And then [the principal] said to me, bluntly, she says, “Why is he only getting an A-minus or A, what's wrong with him? He's not performing at this high peak.” So I said to her—it was a very funny conversation with the principal—I said, “You know what? Wait another year. I promise you, by when he's nine or ten, he'll settle down. Because he read all the comics from me, at five or six, his reading, his skills were there. But [he tended to] wander off, he had high energy, which really was, as you know, the trait for the rest of his life and so forth.So he really got serious about nine, 10 years old. And then he became really not serious in his choice of outside activities—he skied, he played baseball. But I would say, you know how there's the expression, “he settled down”—he settled down around 10, 11, and you could see he was going to be, I wouldn't call it scholarly yet, but that high level of achievement.DL: And then I know of course, and we all know of course, about his résumé and his credentials. He went to Harvard College. He studied abroad in Cambridge. He went to Harvard Law School. He clerked for Judge [Michael Daly] Hawkins on the Ninth Circuit. He worked at a very prestigious law firm, now known as Kellogg Hansen, and then he went into academia. But as I recall from past interviews, you've said that his success as a lawyer or as an academic is actually not what you're most proud of about him as an adult.RM: That's true. I'm most proud of him as a father and as what all his friends call the ”connector” part, the friend part. But let me talk about the father part for a minute. He was really amazing—his love for his children was so special. He would go to their daycare centers when they were small and he would have breakfast with the kids. He would read. As a dad he had a strong Jewish identity, and he would often at the daycare center say, this Jewish holiday is coming up, this is Christmas, this is Hanukkah. He would read stories, and they really liked that aspect of him.He also was amazing because when the children would do any artwork, Danny put up a clothesline, he had a very open space across his living room, and he hung all their artwork. And what was so funny is when some of the students—he invited all the students who went with him to the final-level criminal courses [over] for dinner—and they were shocked because they thought, oh my, they're coming to the stuffy professor's house, and if they didn't trip over the toys, they were lucky. Right across the room was all this artwork, and I used to tease him: he started a new design category called “Preschool Decor.”He was funny. He was really—as you know, Danny had an academic side—but his social side was so, so strong and so much a part of him that everywhere he went—and he lived in a lot of places, you mentioned a few, New York, Tel Aviv, London, Boston, San Francisco, Toronto—he always stayed connected. And he used to say, “Oh, my best friend here.” So we used to tease him—you have a hundred best friends in New York, a hundred here, a hundred there. And it was true actually. When he passed away, the memorializing [took place] all over the world. So he was blessed. We were blessed in that whole aspect of his life.DL: Fast forwarding now to the terrible events of July 2014, which again you talk about in detail in your book, what was it like when you heard the news that Dan had been shot? I think you said in the book that it was like an out-of-body experience, that it was just really surreal for you?RM: Right. I had several experiences. The first is numbness, and in the book I do talk about the purpose of the book. Maybe I should say it now because it'll give you really where I'm going. So I wrote the book, which is called The Unveiling: A Mother's Reflection on Murder, Grief, and the Trial Life, and the reason I wrote it and called it [that] is what's so significant here.The title of the book is The Unveiling. In Jewish life, the unveiling is the time after a person is buried, the gravesite has been settled, the funeral is over, [and] there's different cultural customs, but we chose about eight months after the [funeral for the] unveiling. On the tombstone is writing. And we spent a lot of time as a family writing what's called the inscription. The Jewish tradition is you leave this piece of fabric cover[ing] the tombstone until the day that you actually have a ritual or a service called the unveiling…. And so why I called it The Unveiling is because my real grief process—which is very important, which I want the public to know about, not just me, there's so many school shootings, and I'll come to this in the second part of the reason I wrote the book—but the first part is that was [the start of] my grief journey, the real deep, deep grief. And before that, I did have what you would call an out-of-body experience. I was numb. I was in a daze.The next reason for writing the book is more important to the public, and that's really to lift the curtain on what it is to be in a victim experience, particularly a victim experience in the criminal system. So there's two parts, and they're very important in the follow-through of not just my own personal experience.I'm not sure if you're familiar with it, but there's a term called “homicide survivors.” Homicide survivors are different. It's a different loss and a different trauma than illness and so forth, and the homicide-survivor trauma lasts longer because it doesn't get resolved. In addition, it's the violent, sudden finality of the death, which other types of trauma don't have. Even the pathway afterwards is very different than other losses because now I'll go to the second point, which is the criminal system, and the victim experience of the criminal system, [coupled] with the fact that the psychological component of the trauma is very different, the criminal system doesn't end.And there's no such thing… the word “closure,” I've said it before, it's a word in the dictionary. All those words are not meaningful. You're dealing now with a psychological factor, which is impaired, let's call it, because of the level of grief and the long-term effect and the interaction of the criminal system, which is everlasting. Look, here we are, it's eight years, we're nowhere finished. So it's that combination that really makes this whole experience different.DL: You've actually just answered some of the questions I wanted to raise….RM: Oh, good.DL: … as to why you wrote the book and why you named it The Unveiling, which I think is a very powerful title. Let me ask you this. Some readers might not know, but this is far from your first book—it's your 10th, but your prior books were very different. They were focused on business and career and professional subjects. You've just talked about having to relive that pain and reopen that wound. Were you really convinced to write this book, given that it would involve reliving this trauma that you've just described?RM: No, this was hard. I'll tell you how I started to write the book. You're very right about the other books. [It's a] foreign language when you do a personal-trauma story, it's a foreign language as to business management books, where it's charts and checklists and a whole different kind of process.So how did I write the book, and why did I write the book? Right after Danny's murder—I hate to say the word—we were privileged with the media, as you know well, and you were part of it. There were tons and tons of things happening. I normally wasn't thinking initially of anything like this kind of book, but I did have—so I'm a little older—I did have a box, and I would photocopy and print [stories]. Nobody does that today. But I got this box filled up, which gave me a chronology. I could get the chronology on the internet, as you know, and I did as well, but it was just that, an earlier phase, and I was not planning this kind of book. I knew maybe I would write a book, but not the level that I wrote the trauma about. But, as time progressed, a lot of time actually, because we were preoccupied with the justice system, then it was about a year and a half or two years before the pandemic, which probably was a good thing because I used the pandemic to write, I have to tell you that. So in the period before I started to feel, I have a message, I guess it's because I've written before, whatever, but I started to feel really, I have a message about victims and trauma and grief. And there's not that much out there, and not that much with a personal story. So that was the real sort of the fork in the road. And I decided, okay, now it's serious.Then, as you know, you would know, you go out, you have to get a publisher, an agent, the whole thing. It was after [hitman Sigfredo] Garcia's [trial]… I needed to get, I guess, to Garcia's and [go-between] Katherine [Magbanua]'s trial of 2019…. The trial ended in October and in November, I was in New York looking for, starting the regular routine of pitching the publisher and not the publisher, really, but the agent at that point. And then the pandemic came, January [2020]. I live in Canada, and we locked down very, very early, so it was different here, a whole different climate. We locked down much more, I don't want to say seriously, but I would say more uniformly.Now I'm a person who's always doing something—I'm like Dan or Dan's like me, I don't know which one is which—but the point is I said, oh, now I better get this together. And that's what I did. I really wrote in the pandemic, the first year, because it was a good time to write—not smart time, maybe, because you are isolated. I hardly saw my grandkids, Canadian grandkids in that time, but I was, yes, the fact is that I was busy and I was occupied, but it was very hard. The first part of the book on the grief and the murder and the finding out, it was more than challenging.DL: Did you find the book therapeutic in terms of writing it and talking to other survivors of homicide? I know, for example, you mentioned in the book you had a coach, someone who had gone through a similarly awful experience. Did you find some solace in writing the book?RM: I wouldn't call it solace. I did have support. The coach was terrific and we had excellent expertise and legal support, as you know, from Gibson Dunn and others, and a lot of Danny's friends. So we were definitely privileged.I can't tell you… I can't tell you that the book in any way has added any closure. I don't use the word, but any help, “therapeutic”—has there been any cathartic benefit? Not yet. When we'll come to the grandparent legislation, the answer is totally different. And that's what's fascinating because I'm in the process still of the criminal system, I think because I'm still a victim.Look, I'm going to put it out in—I don't know if you want to go into the case, who's arrested and when, but we went through, now Garcia was arrested in 2016, later [hitman Luis] Rivera, later Katherine Magbanua. We didn't have any trial until 2019. And then there's the appeal of Garcia. What we just went through, just to give you the current view, is really amazing. We just did the trial from a point of view of calendar for Katherine Magbanua. We just finished it right in May, in July was sentencing, and Shelly, my daughter, had to do the victim impact statement. Then following that, Charlie Adelson was arrested, just before Katherine Magbanua's trial. Then he had the Arthur [bail] hearing. Now Katherine is appealing, and you know, the public doesn't see all this, but we are in full-blown systems and movements and conversations and communications about what's happening. And so that's why I think in all fairness, the book has not yet been as cathartic, let's call it. It's very helpful for me now to go out and talk about the victim experience, but because I'm still so immersed, I don't know if I have that feeling [of catharsis]. I'm still like a student in school. I didn't graduate yet. I'm studying still, if you know what I'm trying to say. It's continuous.DL: And you mentioned that throughout the book. You talk about, for example, even the different vocabulary words that you're learning as part of the legal process. And the book is interesting. There's an update at the end on the legal proceedings where you talk about how Katherine is about to be retried, and then of course now we know she was convicted on the retrial and sentenced. And then, of course, since the publication there has been another series of developments—for example, denial of Charlie Adelson's bail request, [after] the so-called Arthur hearing under Florida law.How would you say you feel in a general sense, given the state of developments right now? You have three people who have been convicted and put behind bars, and you have this pending appeal from Katherine, but honestly I don't think it's going anywhere, knock on wood. And then you have, of course, Charlie's looming trial for the first part of 2023. I know you may want to be a little guarded in some of the things you say, but what would you say you just feel generally about where the state of the legal proceedings is right now?RM: I think for us, for me… 2022 has been a great year, in the sense—and I'll explain why it has been very, very good. After 2016, after the arrest—I'm going to go into the grandparent issue for a minute because it relates to why 2022 has been very important—after the arrest in 2016, Wendi, Danny's ex-wife, cut us off from visiting the children. We tried behind the scenes, the lawyers and so forth, and we even used the media. Now, just to put it in perspective, we are privileged with the media, but Phil and I, Dan's father, we never went [to the media right after] Dan was murdered. Most parents and most lawyers, they bring their clients out into public view, and we didn't—we didn't need to, because Danny had quite a bit of international acclaim, he was memorialized all over the world, and [going public] was really not our way of grieving. However, after we were unable to see the boys, Benjamin and Lincoln, Dan's children, we decided, let's try whatever we can to get some exposure to the fact that we are not able to see these young children. So that's what we did. We went [to the media], we were going to anyway, the programs were running, as you know, 20/20 had two sessions, Dateline had two two-hour sessions, then the [Over My Dead Body] podcast came out, and so forth. So it's been an unusual journey [in having] so much media available to us.Then also, which really is a privilege, Jason Solomon started Justice For Dan. And he even started a petition on Justice For Dan to have people sign, and there were a lot of Canadians, a lot of Americans who signed [in support of] us to be able to see the children. Anyway, needless to say, that was effective, but not enough—it gave us a voice, but not a change in dynamics, let's call it.Anyway, so what happened was after Garcia's trial, it was October 12th, 2019, I'm in Tallahassee, it's my birthday, I'm in the hairdresser, and this young woman [Karen Halperin Cyphers] comes over to me and she says, “Can I give you a hug?” And I don't really know her, I don't recognize her as one of Dan's friends, but I could see she's his age, I thought maybe she saw me on TV. And then she told me who she was and so we went for coffee. And then she said to me….Now this is really important in the process of grief, I'm going to explain to you—I was advised by my New York lawyer, Matt Benjamin from Gibson Dunn, “Ruth, you're going to have to write a bill” [if you want to address the problem of grandparent alienation]. I'm sitting in Toronto. This is in 2016, after we went on Dateline and 20/20. A bill. I'm sitting in Toronto. What do I know? I'm in Canada. Although I had advocacy experience in my early, early social-work career, I did not know the American system, and also we are a little different in Canada, it didn't occur to me even that that [might be] the solution. And then my other friend said, “It's all-American—you have to get lobbyists.” So I prepped, I'm getting the buzz in my ear, but I didn't do anything for three years. And why I think this is important—I'll get back to the journey—the reason it's important is because many families that are grieving, they want to memorialize their child, they want to start a foundation, they want to do something, but they don't break out of it from out of their head. So here was my experience, I was sitting on it for three years, but Karen Halperin Cyphers says to me, right in the coffee shop [in October 2019], “Okay, what can I do for you?” And I just blurt out, “Grandparent alienation.” And she says, “Done.” So here I am, fortunate that Karen had all of these contacts through her position—at the time she was a partner in a media firm in Tallahassee—and this was only in October 2019. In January of 2020, Karen already organized in the Senate, [Florida State Senator] Jeff Brandes actually wrote a bill, got it passed in the Senate, but we couldn't get it into the other house in 2020. So this is another part. Try, try, and try again…. This is why we're coming back to 2022. Why is it such an exceptional year? In the first part of 2022, [Florida House Speaker] Chris Sprowls decided that he would get a representation in the House and the Senate at the same time, and he really organized. Anyway, the best news in the world: the Senate passed it unanimously, and the House was, I think, 112-3. And in the end, Governor DeSantis signed it on June 24. So that's the first part of 2022—and a really big part of the success that we feel. So the mood is changing, is what I'm trying to tell you.Now, the next good part of 2022. So Katherine Magbanua was scheduled to have her retrial in February. That was postponed. The word is “continued”—I love the word “continue” when it meets “canceled,” but we won't go into law language—anyway, and it's till May 16th. In the same period, I get an email from Wendi Adelson, that's Danny's ex-wife, the mother of his children: “Ruth, we're making a bar mitzvah for Benjamin around May 14th”—two days before the actual Katherine Magbanua trial—”and we're inviting you all then.” “All” means us plus Shelly's family.I couldn't be more delighted. And I said, yes, we're coming for sure, and then I suggested, “Can we have an in-person visit on May 13th, the day before the bar mitzvah? The kids have not seen us now [for a long time].” So she writes back right away, “You know what? If you want an in-person visit, come in April.” First the date she selected was the Passover date, then she wrote back, apologies, come April 20th. And we said, we're on. We came April 20th. We saw the kids. We had a wonderful visit. We get back to Toronto, let's say, 1 a.m. on April 21st, at 6 a.m. I get a call from law enforcement in Tallahassee—well, they're not in Tallahassee, now they're down in Broward [County in South Florida]—and they just arrested Charlie Adelson. In 24 hours, a lot on the children and on the case.So 2022, this is the big year, right…. it's an actually an important story piece because families wait and, and certainly for us, the waiting and uncertainty are really the characteristics of the victim experience. But this is just an example of sometimes when the waiting does materialize into something that's very fruitful.DL: Just to rewind a little bit, you mentioned the passage and the signing into law of the Markel Act, which deals with the problem of grandparent alienation. Can you say briefly to listeners what the Markel Act permits?RM: The Markel Act, actually, is not a broad-based, all-encompassing act for any grandparent who's alienated or any grandparent who has difficulty. Florida laws are very restrictive, [some] of the most restrictive ones in North America, and considering they have all these elderly people, their grandparent legislation is very, very restrictive. And there's a piece in there that people have to understand. The reason it's restricted is because the natural parent in Florida has the right for autonomy and privacy [in child rearing], and that is huge, and that trumps anything else, and it always has to be reviewed against what are their rights.So what happened with the Grandparent Act? When it was developed, it was developed to meet a very specific set of circumstances, which is if one of the partners in the marriage or ex-marriage or whatever divorced relationship was deceased or is deceased, and the other partner has some civil or criminal findings against them, that gives the grandparents rights to go to the courts and request a visit, and the request is less conditional than under other circumstances because those findings have to be met. So to that extent, it's very restrictive.Having said that, and one of the most amazing things of why I said earlier on, I have to say that having passed this legislation has really given me—I would say I always have hope, but it has given me more satisfaction on a different level—do you know how many people write to me now asking how to use the Markel Act, telling me about grandparent alienation, and what's really sad is how many circumstances there are in Florida where [the Act might apply]. [There is also a 2015 law about grandparent visitation rights, which] is something else which I did another presentation on… like if your child has committed a felony. It's not the same. It's not the Markel Act, I have to say. But the point is, what happens? These adult children come out of prison, and the grandparents have taken care of the kids all these years, and [the adult children] tell [the grandparents], “Bye bye, Charlie.” So the grandparents lose out, and the children really lose that because that's their new family. But those families can get help—not necessarily [from] the strength of the grandparent legislation, but there are places to help them, and also they should know to go to Legal Aid as well.DL: That's really important, and I'm glad you're sharing that information with people. One of the things that's interesting to note—it's very selfless in a way, what you've done, because the Markel Act, as I understand it, does not at the current time apply to your particular case. But on the bright side, I do note that very shortly after its passage, you were invited by Wendi to meet with the boys.So I see we're almost out of time. In closing, can you talk about how much contact you have with the boys right now? Because for those of us reading the book, that was in many ways one of the most heartbreaking things—that for years, you were kept away from your grandsons after this horrific event. Can you talk a bit about how often you get to see them now and under what circumstances?RM: We're only at a stage where the door is open, like a crack in the door. We did try to get some Zooms on the boys' birthdays to wish them happy birthday. We were successful. We made other attempts to get visits, which didn't materialize, but just recently, I asked Wendi for a visit in December, and she approved, she confirmed it. So that'll be the next visit. We saw the boys, we had contact with them in April, and now I'm really hopeful that I will get to see them in December. So we're, you know, it's a rocky ship still, but it's more open communication. And although small, but it's working in the right direction, very incremental, small steps. And so forth.DL: As you mentioned, 2022 was a big, big year for you and your family. My final question is, what are you hoping for or expecting from 2023? Which is not that far away, less than two months until the start of the new year. What are you looking forward to in the coming year?RM: I'm looking forward to, look, right now, I'll put it this way, the grandparent priority is a little bit, I don't want to say on the back burner at all, but it's less. Now we have to get justice in the criminal system, which has always been the competing priority…. So that's really one of the things I do want to say that I'm also looking at now, and in 2023 I want to make sure that people understand the victim experience, and particularly the legal and professional people who help—psychologists, lawyers, clergy, whatever, have to understand the victim experience. How can you learn to develop compassion for the victim in all these professions?I have an agenda, I guess I'm a person who has agendas, and this is really because I really think it's an undervalued [experience]. And there's a statement, I read this in one of the reports in Canada, the [statement] is “the victim is the orphan of the criminal system.” And so that's my new challenge, and I hope that there are some lawyers, legal schools, law firms listening today. I have a lot of programs that I would really like to talk about in terms of an educational format to get the sensitization to what the victim experiences in the criminal system.DL: Well, I think you've been doing a wonderful job of advancing your agenda, just in terms of getting people to understand that victim experience. And of course getting legislation passed to help other grandparents in similar situations. And of course spearheading and enduring this long, long quest for justice for Dan's murderers.So again, on behalf of my listeners, on behalf of all of us who knew and cared for Dan, thank you, Ruth, for everything you've done. You are really an inspiration—just how you have endured this tragedy with such dignity and grace and how you have managed to try and find some things positive out of an unspeakable tragedy. So thank you.RM: Thank you very much, and please continue writing. You're doing a great job.DL: Will do.RM: I always welcome your articles and your support, so thank you.DL: Thanks again to Ruth for joining me. As I have said before, her resilience and strength over these past eight-plus years, as well as how she has used her experience to help both other victims and other grandparents, is nothing short of inspiring.As always, thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers, for tuning in. If you'd like to connect with me, you can email me at davidlat@substack.com, and you can find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe to Original Jurisdiction. Since this podcast is new, please help spread the word by telling your friends about it. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, as is most of the newsletter content, but it is made possible by your paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode of the Original Jurisdiction podcast should appear two weeks from now, on or about Wednesday, November 30. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; and (3) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe

Saee Muzumdar, an M&A partner at Gibson Dunn in New York, discussed what she learned from beginning her career during the financial crisis of 2008 and how dealmakers are adjusting to challenging markets. 

In today's episode I speak with Eli Albrecht who is an Associate at Gibson Dunn's Washington D.C. office where he is a member of the corporate practice with a focus on private equity and mergers and acquisitions. In addition to his day job, Eli writes about his own path in the legal profession primarily on LinkedIn where, in his words, he focuses on balancing life as a private equity lawyer, husband, and LawDad in a way that is "fully integrated." He shares openly about finding the balance between being a fully engaged dad and working in a highly demanding legal practice and how he practices his faith while also practicing law. In our conversation we discuss his path to the law, a day in the life of a corporate M&A lawyer in a big international law firm, the skills that help corporate lawyers stand out (and how to acquire those skills after law school), why M&A law is like wedding planning, how he navigates being a Sabbath-observant Jew in an always-on profession, the importance of enjoying the stage you are at, rejuvenating during the slow times so you are ready in the fast times, his personal approach (and journey) to being an effective lawyer while also being a engaged father, and more. This episode is sponsored, edited, and engineered by LawPods, a professional podcast production company for busy attorneys. *** Want to Support the Podcast in 2 minutes or less? Leave a Review (this helps the algorithm connect me to new listeners) Subscribe on iTunes or Spotify Purchase How I Lawyer Merchandise Share on LinkedIn or Twitter

Residents of Jackson, Mississippi, have thrust the city's failure to provide clean water into federal court, suing numerous public officials and engineering firms that they say have degraded the city's water through negligence and mismanagement. This week on Pro Say, the hosts dive into the specifics of the proposed class action and break down the lengthy battle that likely lies ahead. Also on this week's show, a California judge raps Gibson Dunn for its questionable discovery conduct representing Facebook in a suit over the Cambridge Analytica data harvesting scandal, and the New York attorney general fixes her sights on the Trump Organization amid allegations of massive banking fraud. Finally, the Pro Say crew catches you up on the legal machinations that led to the freeing of “Serial” podcast subject Adnan Syed after 23 years behind bars for allegedly murdering his high school girlfriend.

With Chris Stigall filling in for Vince Coglianese, Chris breaks down the FBI raid on Maralago.  Tom Dupree, former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Partner at Gibson Dunn joins the program to discuss the legal perspective of the FBI raid. For more coverage on the issues that matter to you visit www.WMAL.com, download the WMAL app or tune in live on WMAL-FM 105.9 from 3-6pm. To join the conversation, check us out on social media: @WMAL @VinceCoglianeseSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chris Stigall speaks with Tom Dupree, former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Partner at Gibson Dunn about the legal perspective of the FBI raid. For more coverage on the issues that matter to you visit www.WMAL.com, download the WMAL app or tune in live on WMAL-FM 105.9 from 3-6pm. To join the conversation, check us out on social media: @WMAL @VinceCoglianeseSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On today's episode of Movers, Shakers & Rainmakers, our hosts are joined by the Chief of Staff of Edelson PC, Kelsey McCann, to chat about the exciting world of high-stakes plaintiffs' work. Kelsey discusses Edelson's growth and success, what cases the firm is focusing on and their social impact, and why she thinks young lawyers are looking to join firms that are making a difference in the world. For their moves of the week, David discusses moves into and out of Gibson Dunn, while Zach highlights Perkins Coie adding to its EC/VC practice. As always, be sure to rate, review, and subscribe!

It's that time again! Movers, Shakers & Rainmakers is back and this week, our hosts chat with Viet Nguyen of Wilson Sonsini about the importance of understanding business considerations as a lawyer, what it was like to make a lateral move in 2021, and the growing importance of Environmental, Social, and Governance ("ESG") work. For their moves of the week, David breaks down Weil Gotshal picking up a prominent partner from Gibson Dunn, while Zach highlights Sheppard Mullin expanding its energy team in California. Like what you hear from our hosts? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe!

In this episode of the Legal Marketing 2.0 podcast, Guy is joined by Marsha Redmon to discuss how to master virtual presenting. Marsha is the CEO of Marsha Redmon Communications. For over 20 years Marsha has helped lawyers and executives communicate more effectively in order to get more business through presentations, public speaking workshops, business development and law firm video marketing coaching. She is also a former Gibson Dunn attorney and a TV news reporter.