Podcasts about wachtell

For a special episode of the Anchoring Truths Podcast, we bring you a presentation featuring Prof. Julia Mahoney of the University of Virginia School of Law. Prof. Mahoney examines how the Classical Legal Tradition has been making a return in American law. She discusses some recent opinions that provide a hopeful opportunity for its return to legal practice and describes the rising interest in this perspective within legal academia. Julia D. Mahoney teaches courses in property, government finance, constitutional law and nonprofit organizations. A graduate of Yale Law School, she joined the University of Virginia faculty as an associate professor in 1999 and is now John S. Battle Professor of Law. She has also taught at the University of Southern California Law School and the University of Chicago Law School, and before entering the legal academy, practiced law at the New York firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. Her scholarly articles include works on land preservation, eminent domain, health care reform and property rights in human biological materials.

George Conway is an attorney, political activist, and legal and political commentator. He is president of the Society for the Rule of Law, the executive director of the Anti-Psychopath Political Action Committee, and a founder of the Lincoln Project. He is a host of The Bulwark's podcast George Conway Explains It All (to Sarah Longwell), and he is a contributing writer to The Atlantic. He previously worked as a litigator for three decades at the law firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz in New York City. With the most important, consequential election in American history just four days away, we're thrilled to have George back with us to share his unique homestretch analysis. Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit davidlat.substack.comWith a contentious election just around the corner, tensions are running high, and it's easy to focus on what divides us. So my latest podcast interview, featuring Judge Kenneth Lee of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, is quite timely. The son of immigrants from South Korea—and an immigrant himself, who came to the United States at age four—Judge Lee still believes in the greatness of America.In our conversation, Judge Lee and I discussed his parents, including the challenges they faced after arriving in the U.S.; his high-powered legal career, including stints at Wachtell Lipton, the White House Counsel's office, and Jenner & Block; the best and worst parts of being a judge; his philosophy of legal writing; and his approach to law clerk hiring. We also looked back on our time together at Wachtell, which is where we first met, some 23 years ago—and where Ken racked up billable hours that you'll find hard to believe. But as his former colleague, I can attest that he works incredibly hard—now in service to the Constitution and laws of the United States.Show Notes:* Kenneth K. Lee bio, Wikipedia* Kenneth Lee, Senate Judiciary Committee questionnairePrefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.Sponsored by:NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email careerdevelopment at nexfirm dot com.

George Conway is an attorney, political activist, and legal and political commentator. He is president of the Society for the Rule of Law, the executive director of the Anti-Psychopath Political Action Committee, and a founder of the Lincoln Project. He is a host of The Bulwark's podcast George Conway Explains It All (to Sarah Longwell), and he is a contributing writer to The Atlantic. He previously worked as a litigator for three decades at the law firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz in New York City. In his inimitable way, George dissects the mind of Trump and his followers and the impact of it all on the campaign and what lies ahead for the November 5th election. It's a truly fascinating, in-depth ,don't miss chat! Got somethin' to say?! Email us at BackroomAndy@gmail.com Leave us a message: 845-307-7446 Twitter: @AndyOstroy Produced by Andy Ostroy, Matty Rosenberg, and Jennifer Hammoud @ Radio Free Rhiniecliff Design by Cricket Lengyel

Many of you have likely noticed, as we have, some of the news coming out of Delaware about certain rulings, the debate around those rulings, and the subsequent debate around actions taken by the legislature to clarify Delaware law. As we've read about these developments, we were intrigued and turned to the team at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz (WLRK) for their thoughts on these matters. We were extremely pleased to have Ryan McLeod, Partner, and Dan Neff, Partner and Member of the Executive Committee, join us for a far-ranging and intriguing discussion on these issues. Ryan joined WLRK in 2013 and specializes in representing corporations and directors in litigation involving mergers and acquisitions, proxy contests, corporate governance disputes, and class and derivative actions involving allegations of breach and fiduciary duty. He also serves as a Lecturer in Law at Columbia and has extensive experience litigating corporate matters in the Delaware Court of Chancery and the Delaware Supreme Court. Dan has over four decades of experience advising major companies in high-profile transactions and served as WLRK's Co-Chairman for 20 years through October 2023. He specializes in mergers and acquisitions, corporate governance, and securities law and has represented clients in a broad range of industries including energy, technology and telecom, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing/industrials, retail/consumer products, gaming, and more. In our conversation, Ryan first provides perspective on Delaware's importance to corporate law and the large percentage of companies that are incorporated there. Ryan walks us through three specific legal rulings that prompted amendments in Delaware including the Twitter stockholder litigation, the Activision merger case, and a case involving contractual governance and shareholder veto rights. We discuss the significant and unique amount of public debate surrounding these amendments, the practical impact of Delaware rulings on corporate governance, particularly in activist settlements and private equity deals, and the implications for boards and corporate lawyers. We also touch on whether these developments might lead boards to become more cautious in decision-making, the historical context of Delaware appraisal cases, and changing complexities around CEO compensation. We explore the Caremark Doctrine's increasing relevance in corporate governance, the complexity of preparing board minutes to show transparency and thoroughness without over-disclosing, and emerging corporate governance risks. Ryan and Dan also share their insights on what sets Delaware law apart from other states, how companies manage external pressures from activism, the future of corporate governance, and much more. Thank you, Ryan and Dan, for sharing your insights and expertise with us all! We learned a tremendous amount. Mike Bradley kicked us off with a few updates. He noted that the FED's 50-basis point rate cut was initially received well, but since then, most markets have traded sideways. On the bond market front, the 10-year U.S. bond yield actually increased as the rate cut was mostly expected. He noted consensus around additional rate cuts in 2024 and 2025. He also noted that the 2yr/10yr bond yield spread widened to ~20-basis points after being inverted for the past two-plus years. On crude oil, WTI price has traded sideways this week (~$71/bbl) and Mike discussed several positive developments which could temporarily be supporting crude oil prices including a Chinese stimulus program, continued historic “net short” length in Brent futures and growing Mideast conflict. OPEC published its annual World Oil Outlook this week (linked here) and again raised its global oil demand estimates (~113mmbpd for 2030 & ~120mmbpd for 2050) which is well above the view of many others. He then flagged that this week is Climate Week in N

We interview Leo Strine on the purpose of the corporation, differentiating between shareholder primacy and stakeholder theory. We discuss ESG and the power of stockholders and workers. Leo Strine applies his perspective on corporate purpose to corporate acquisitions and lays out his hopes for the future of corporations. Some critical articles to learn more about the shareholder primacy vs stakeholder theory debate:Origins of the argument: - Merrick Dodd, For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees?, 45 HARV. L. REV. 1145 (1932) - Adolph A. Berle, Jr., For Whom Corporate Managers Are Trustees: A Note, 45 HARV.. L. REV. 1365, 1372 (1932)Shareholder primacy ownership argument: - Milton Friedman, A Friedman doctrine– The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits, N.Y. Times, Sept. 13 1970.Critique on shareholder primacy: - Lynn A. Stout, Bad and Not-so-Bad Arguments for Shareholder Primacy, 75 S. CAL. L. REV. 1189 (2002).Example of Application: - Lucian Bebchuk and Roberto Tallarita, The Illusory Promise of Stakeholder Governance. 106 Corn. L. Rev. 91 (2020).Example of Court Case Application: - Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., 506 A.2d 173, 177 (Del. 1986)A bit about Leo Strine:Leo E. Strine, Jr., is Of Counsel in the Corporate Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.  Prior to joining the firm, he was the Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court from early 2014 through late 2019.  Before becoming the Chief Justice, he served on the Delaware Court of Chancery as Chancellor since June 22, 2011, and as a Vice Chancellor since November 9, 1998.In his judicial positions, Mr. Strine wrote hundreds of opinions in the areas of corporate law, contract law, trusts and estates, criminal law, administrative law, and constitutional law.  Notably, he authored the lead decision in the Delaware Supreme Court case holding that Delaware's death penalty statute was unconstitutional because it did not require the key findings necessary to impose a death sentence to be made by a unanimous jury.For a generation, Mr. Strine taught various corporate law courses at the Harvard and University of Pennsylvania law schools, and now serves as the Michael L. Wachter Distinguished Fellow in Law and Policy at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and a Senior Fellow of the Harvard Program on Corporate Governance. From 2006 to 2019, Mr. Strine served as the special judicial consultant to the ABA's Committee on Corporate Laws. He also was the special judicial consultant to the ABA's Committee on Mergers & Acquisitions from 2014 to 2019. He is a member of the American Law Institute.Mr. Strine speaks and writes frequently on the subjects of corporate and public law, and particularly the impact of business on society, and his articles have been published in The University of Chicago Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Cornell Law Review, Duke Law Journal, Harvard Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, and Stanford Law Review, among others.  On several occasions, his articles were selected as among the Best Corporate and Securities Articles of the year, based on the choices of law professors.Before becoming a judge in 1998,  Mr. Strine served as Counsel and Policy Director to Governor Thomas R. Carper, and had also worked as a corporate litigator at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom from 1990 to 1992.  He was law clerk to Judge Walter K. Stapleton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and Chief Judge John F. Gerry of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.  Mr. Strine graduated magna cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania Law Sc

Most agree that children's online privacy is important. But how should it be protected? Ryan Durrie, Associate Director of the Cordell Institute at Washington University in St. Louis, joins Christina Ma and Anora Wang to discuss how the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (or COPPA) protects online privacy today and how it could be reformed. Listen to this episode if you want to learn about the latest policy developments in online privacy. With special guest: Ryan Durrie, Associate Director, Cordell Institute at Washington University in St. Louis Related Links: Cordel Institute for Policy in Law and Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, Comment to FTC on COPPA (Mar. 12, 2024) Neil Richards, Woodrow Hartzog, & Jordan Francis, A Concrete Proposal for Data Loyalty (2023)  Hosted by: Anora Wang, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP and Christina Ma, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz

Privacy law has become increasingly relevant and important with the advent of the internet and all things digital and most agree that these laws should protect children's privacy, in particular. But what are the tradeoffs? James Cooper, Professor of Law and Economics at Scalia Law School at George Mason University, joins Christina Ma and Anora Wang to discuss the Children's Online Privacy and Protection Act, proposed changes to the rules enforcing the Act, and the potential tradeoffs to certain proposals. Listen to this episode of Our Curious Amalgam if you want to learn more about how the U.S. regulates online privacy for kids and its impact. With special guest: James Cooper, Antonin Scalia Law School Related Links: Garrett Johnson, Tesary Lin, James Cooper and Liang Zhong, COPPAcalypse (2023) Comment on FTC's Proposed COPPA Rulemaking, Program on Economics & Privacy, George Mason University Scalia Law School (2024) Hosted by: Christina Ma, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Anora Wang, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

John Coates is the Deputy Dean of Harvard Law School. He has served at the Securities and Exchange Commission, and was a partner at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, specializing in financial institutions. He has testified before Congress and provided consulting services to the Department of Justice, the Department of Treasury, and the New York Stock Exchange. He is author of the ‘The Problem of Twelve: When a Few Financial Institutions Control Everything'. This podcast covers: the rise of the public company, how companies balance the interests of society, the 1970s disruption to corporate order, and much more.    Follow us here for more amazing insights: https://macrohive.com/home-prime/ https://twitter.com/Macro_Hive https://www.linkedin.com/company/macro-hive

In the latest episode of Drinks With The Deal, Wachtell's Jake Kling talks about milestone deals for him, what he learned from his clerkship and how becoming a parent changed his view of being a lawyer.

Elina Tetelbaum, a Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz activist defense partner, takes AIT behind the scenes to explain how companies and activists negotiate confidentiality agreements, as well as the trading and campaigning restrictions they typically include.

This week I had the distinct pleasure of visiting with former Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court, the Honorable Leo E. Strine, Jr., Of Counsel, at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. Judge Strine and I discuss the intense focus on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards and the pressures on corporate directors and managers occasioned by the Caremark decision and its progeny, among other developments. These initiatives have particular relevance to businesses many of our clients and listeners manage, as they often involve environmentally sensitive chemical products and manufacturing operations. We discuss Judge Strine's thoughts on implementing ESG programs by building upon existing corporate compliance programs and how best to allocate compliance responsibilities between corporate boards and senior management. Leo E. Strine, Jr., Kirby M. Smith, and Reilly S. Steel, “Caremark and ESG, Perfect Together: A Practical Approach to Implementing an Integrated, Efficient, and Effective Caremark and EESG Strategy,” Iowa Law Review, Volume 106, Issue 4, 2021. https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-106-issue-4/caremark-and-esg-perfect-together-a-practical-approach-to-implementing-an-integrated-efficient-and-effective-caremark-and-eesg-strategy Leo E. Strine, Jr., “Good Corporate Citizenship We Can All Get Behind?: Toward A Principled, Non-Ideological Approach To Making Money The Right Way,” The Business Lawyer, Volume 78, Spring 2023. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4296287 ALL MATERIALS IN THIS PODCAST ARE PROVIDED SOLELY FOR INFORMATIONAL  AND ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES. THE MATERIALS ARE NOT INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE OR THE PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES. ALL LEGAL QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED DIRECTLY BY A LICENSED ATTORNEY PRACTICING IN THE APPLICABLE AREA OF LAW. ©2024 Bergeson & Campbell, P.C.  All Rights Reserved

On this episode of our miniseries, “Fashion and Beauty: Breaking the Mold”, Jeff Lee, the dynamic CEO and co-founder of DIBS Beauty, speaks to his unique blend of entrepreneurial vision and strategic prowess in the beauty industry. We delve into the intriguing pivots he's made throughout his career from his role as a senior associate at Wachtell to serving as COO of- A-Rod Corp and how each stage set him up to be a successful founder today. As a seasoned entrepreneur and legal professional, Jeff provides valuable insights while drawing parallels between the mindset of a founder and the responsibilities of a lawyer. Discover the specialized support lawyers can provide to founders in this unique space, where regulatory considerations and industry nuances play a crucial role. Follow and connect with us at our ⁠⁠LinkedIn⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠ More on HLEP at ⁠⁠clinics.law.harvard.edu/hlep

This Day in Legal History: Shoe Bomber SentencedOn this day, January 30th, in the year 2003, a significant event in the annals of legal and aviation history unfolded when Richard Reid, a British national, received a life sentence in the United States for an act of terrorism that gripped the world. Reid's infamous attempt to destroy an American passenger plane with a bomb concealed in his shoe marked a chilling moment in aviation security.It was on December 21, 2001, when Reid boarded a flight at Miami International Airport, destined for Paris, with a sinister plan. Hidden within his shoe was an explosive device, a fact unknown to fellow passengers and crew as the flight commenced. The calm of the flight was shattered when Reid made his move to ignite the explosive device. However, the narrative took a dramatic turn as alert passengers and crew members quickly intervened. Displaying remarkable courage and presence of mind, they restrained Reid, thwarting what could have been a catastrophic tragedy in mid-air. This act of collective bravery averted potential loss of life and highlighted the importance of vigilance in air travel.Reid's arrest and subsequent trial brought to light the ever-present threats in aviation and the need for stringent security measures. His conviction and life sentence, handed down on this day, served as a stark reminder of the ongoing battle against terrorism and the importance of international cooperation in ensuring the safety of air travel.Richard Reid's case not only transformed airport security protocols worldwide but also became a case study in counter-terrorism strategies. It underscored the reality that threats can come in the most unexpected forms and from seemingly ordinary individuals. Today, as we look back on this day in legal history, we are reminded of the thin line between normalcy and chaos in our interconnected world.Legal malpractice claims against law firms are on the rise, both in frequency and in financial magnitude. This trend is driven by a combination of factors, including large insurance policies held by law firms, client reluctance to pay fees, and the involvement of investors in litigation. As a result, law firms increasingly find themselves as defendants in costly lawsuits.Clients are suing their legal counsel for various alleged missteps, such as conflicts of interest and failure to file documents on time. This has led to a specialty emerging among attorneys in suing law firms. Bethany Kristovich, a litigation partner, observes a growing tendency for clients to view law firms as just another source of financial compensation.A 2023 report by Ames & Gough highlights the escalating scale of these claims, with seven out of ten insurers of top law firms paying claims over $50 million in recent years, and two exceeding $150 million. The most common areas for malpractice claims are trusts and estates, and business and commercial transactions.Law firms' perceived financial backing by substantial insurance policies makes them attractive targets for malpractice suits. Economic pressures further exacerbate this vulnerability, leading clients to dispute fees, especially during tough business conditions. High-profile cases, such as X Corp.'s (owned by Elon Musk) lawsuit against Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz over $90 million fees, illustrate this trend.Attorneys, once reluctant to sue fellow law firms, now pursue these cases more freely, as seen in the success of Reid Collins & Tsai in securing substantial settlements from such lawsuits. The firm's approach often involves a pre-suit process, maintaining discretion and good relations with insurance carriers and law firms.Kristovich predicts an increase in claims related to breaches of fiduciary duties and conflicts of interest. She notes a shift in the nature of allegations, with law firms now more likely to be sued for their association with a client's alleged crimes, rather than just their legal advice. This changing landscape suggests a more challenging environment for legal practices in managing their professional risks.Legal Malpractice Claims Grow in Size as Clients Turn on CounselJustice Sonia Sotomayor, during an appearance at the University of California, Berkeley's law school, expressed that she is feeling the strain of an increasingly demanding workload at the Supreme Court. Sotomayor, who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2009 and is the first Latina justice, mentioned the court's packed schedule, which includes significant cases on abortion, guns, social media, and a Trump ballot issue. She noted the growing number of emergency cases and briefs from outside groups as factors contributing to her exhaustion.Sotomayor remarked that the court's emergency calendar is now active almost weekly, a significant change from when the justices had a substantial summer break. In response to UC Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky's query about how to address student disillusionment with the Supreme Court and the Constitution, Sotomayor emphasized the importance of continuing to fight for justice. She referenced historical figures like Justice Thurgood Marshall, Rep. John Lewis, and civil rights activists, highlighting their sacrifices and the necessity of persevering against challenges.Sotomayor conveyed her own sense of obligation and commitment, despite the frustrations and emotional toll of her work. She stressed that change requires persistent effort and dedication, underscoring the importance of not yielding to despair in the pursuit of justice.Sotomayor Calls Supreme Court Pace, Workload More Demanding (1)Donald Trump's lawyer, Alina Habba, has raised questions about a potential conflict of interest involving U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over E. Jean Carroll's recent defamation trial. Habba's skepticism stems from a New York Post article that highlighted an alleged prior working relationship between Judge Kaplan and Carroll's lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, at the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in the early 1990s. This claim, based on an unnamed source, suggests that Roberta Kaplan sought to stand out as an associate and Judge Kaplan was "like her mentor."Habba finds this relationship "particularly concerning" and suggests it could be grounds for a new trial. She also accuses Judge Kaplan of being "overtly hostile" towards Trump's side and showing "preferential" treatment to Carroll's, which she believes might support her call for a retrial. Trump's team is planning to appeal the recent $83.3 million verdict against him, which was a result of his 2019 denial of raping Carroll in the 1990s.However, skepticism about these claims might be warranted given the lack of immediate response from Judge Kaplan's chambers, spokespeople for Carroll and Roberta Kaplan, and Paul Weiss. Furthermore, Habba's argument primarily relies on a single media report and an unnamed source, which might not provide the most reliable foundation for such serious allegations. The situation is complicated by the large amount of money involved in the verdict and the ongoing appeal of a previous $5 million award against Trump in a similar case, making the context of these allegations particularly charged.Trump lawyer says judge's possible conflict may taint $83 million Carroll verdict | ReutersIn my column on nonprofit hospitals and tax reform, I discuss the significant tax benefits these institutions receive while often contributing less than 1% of their revenue to charity care. This disparity between tax advantages and charitable contributions raises concerns about the societal benefits these hospitals provide. Given that nonprofit hospitals make up a considerable portion of the healthcare system and are known for high executive compensation, it's clear that policy reforms are needed to ensure these institutions fulfill their societal obligations.To address these issues, I propose enhanced financial transparency and real-time reporting. Nonprofit hospitals should be mandated to provide detailed financial data, including compensation for top executives and a breakdown of expenditures on administrative costs, marketing, and consulting fees. This level of transparency will help the public understand where tax expenditures are being allocated and whether they align with the hospitals' charitable mission.I argue that financial transparency should extend to capital projects, property investments, and outsourced service costs. Large-scale transparency is essential to reassess the relationship between tax expenditures and societal returns, especially considering the potential misallocation of funds.To aid in this endeavor, I suggest utilizing AI and other high-tech solutions. These technologies can manage large datasets and help in developing equitable benchmarks for charitable care. They can also assist in continuous financial monitoring, flagging anomalies in spending patterns.Regarding the tax status of nonprofit hospitals, they must meet specific requirements under Section 501(r) of the tax code. This includes conducting a community health needs assessment every three years and adopting financial assistance policies for patients in need. However, the standards governing expenditures on charity care are less stringent compared to those for patient financial assistance.Balancing accountability is crucial. Public awareness and demand are necessary to recalibrate the priorities of the nonprofit hospital sector. Funds allocated to public health should be viewed as investments, with misallocated resources representing both a loss of investment and an opportunity cost.In summary, my column emphasizes the need for policy reforms to ensure nonprofit hospitals align their tax benefits with societal expectations. Enhanced transparency, supported by technology, and stricter regulation are key to achieving this balance.Nonprofit Hospitals Need Novel Policy Solutions for Tax Reform Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The legal industry used to have a stigma against attorneys representing legal malpractice clients who are suing other attorneys. But that stigma, if it still exists, has definitely faded. Data from legal malpractice insurers shows that the dollar amount of these suits has ballooned in recent years. That includes one of the most high profile suits: Elon Musk's claim against the mega-firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz disputing $90 million in fees for work on his Twitter purchase. On this episode of our news podcast, On The Merits, Bloomberg Law reporter Tatyana Monnay talks about how firms handle legal malpractice suits, why they're more common in bad economic times, and how insurance plays into all of this. Do you have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Bloomberg Radio host Barry Ritholtz speaks to Matt Levine, a Bloomberg Opinion columnist and the author of Money Stuff, a daily newsletter about Wall Street and finance. A former investment banker at Goldman Sachs, he was a mergers and acquisitions lawyer at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz; a clerk for the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; and an editor of Dealbreaker. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Daniel Listwa, an associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLP, joins the Business Scholarship Podcast to discuss his article Shareholder Lock-in and the Corporate Soul: Implications for the First Amendment. This episode is hosted by Andrew Jennings, associate professor of law at Emory University, and was edited by Brynn Radak, a law student at Emory University.

Our Curious Amalgam is celebrating its 250th episode by hosting a family reunion! In this episode, former and current regular hosts Alicia Downey, Anora Wang, Matthew Hall, Christina Ma, Anant Raut, and Sergei Zaslavsky highlight the some of the Top 5 most listened-to episodes, year by year, since OCA first launched in 2019. In addition to looking back at the most popular episodes, we talk about undiscovered gems in the archives and the most important legal trends and developments that have occurred since Episode #1. Listen to this episode for a special look back at the greatest hits of Our Curious Amalgam and discover how they are still relevant today. With special guests: Matthew Hall, McGuireWoods LLP, Christina Ma, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, Anant Raut, Trust & Trade and Sergei Zaslavsky, O'Melveny & Myers LLP Related Links: Trust and Trade Hosted by: Alicia Downey, Downey Law LLC and Anora Wang, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

In this episode, Steve Fretzin and Emily Witt discuss:How Emily's Be That Lawyer tipping point started by rock climbing. Top reasons lawyers are looking to move firms. Advice for lawyers searching for a move. One thing lawyers wish they knew.  Key Takeaways:Many lawyers feel they are in the dark in regards to their career progression. During the pandemic, we saw that many lawyers do enjoy being around their colleagues and getting feedback from their coworkers and senior lawyers. Some lawyers may not need a book of business to move, but for most attorneys, it is a point of leverage and strength in a move. When it comes time to make a move, many lawyers do not understand how big their book of business needs to be, even when they believe it is comfortable already.  "Often lawyers are not aware in law school of what the whole legal landscape looks like, particularly where a lot of law schools give a very siloed view of the law firms that are out there. They might not be completely familiar with the fact that there are boutiques out there and that there are different ways to practice law, and how to get to those different junctures in your career." —  Emily WittGet a free copy of Steve's book “Sales-Free Selling” here: www.fretzin.com/sales-free-selling Thank you to our Sponsors!Get Staffed Up: https://getstaffedup.com/bethatlawyer/Overture: https://overture.law/Get Visible: https://www.getvisible.com/ Episode References: Pod Save The World - https://crooked.com/podcast-series/pod-save-the-world/ About Emily Witt: Emily Witt is a dedicated legal recruiter with over 20 years of experience, both on the law firm side and the agency side. She began her legal career at Wachtell, Lipton Rosen & Katz, where she was the Senior Recruiting Coordinator. Emily took a leap of faith in 2016 to work for a search firm and now places attorneys into roles in law firms and in-house companies. Her passion for women's advancement in tech and healthcare advocacy fueled her desire to specialize in those areas. Emily hosts a podcast, Beyond the Legal Lens, that helps open the door to jobs in tech and health law. She also has a platform, the Advocate's Mic, that highlights mission-driven attorneys who are creating impactful initiatives in their communities.   Connect with Emily Witt:  Website: https://www.beyondthelegallens.com/Show: https://www.beyondthelegallens.com/podcastLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/emilywittslegalpath/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/emily.witt.104/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100085002114417Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/emilydwittInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/beyondthelegallens Connect with Steve Fretzin:LinkedIn: Steve FretzinTwitter: @stevefretzinInstagram: @fretzinsteveFacebook: Fretzin, Inc.Website: Fretzin.comEmail: Steve@Fretzin.comBook: Legal Business Development Isn't Rocket Science and more!YouTube: Steve FretzinCall Steve directly at 847-602-6911  Show notes by Podcastologist Chelsea Taylor-Sturkie Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it. 

Saish Setty is the General Counsel at Parallaxes Capital, an emerging alternative asset manager focused on TRAs (Tax Receivable Agreements) and esoteric assets. As a senior member of the company's deal team, he spearheads the development of TRA strategies, a complex alternative asset class. Parallaxes has deployed more than $250 million across its various funds.  After graduating with a BA in economics from Princeton, Saish earned his JD from Harvard Law School. Before joining Parallaxes, Saish was an Associate at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and began his legal career in the restructuring and finance department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.  As an authority in the legal industry, he has been featured in Fitch Solutions' LevFin Insights, the Reorg Radio podcast, and Forbes. Saish has spoken at events and conferences, including ones sponsored by the Practicing Law Institute and the CFA Society's High Yield Bond Master Class. Having transitioned from corporate law to a growing startup, he can instruct junior associates on making the shift.  In this episode… Some lawyers are content in their roles at private practices, whereas others want to make a more significant impact. These driven professionals are often attracted to startups, where they can contribute to long-term growth. However, transitioning from BigLaw to business is not a hasty decision, as substantial career changes can be a difficult adjustment. Before trading your law firm duties for a fast-growing startup, what should you consider? With more impact comes additional responsibility, which Saish Setty experienced firsthand after moving from BigLaw to an emerging alternative asset startup. You may be required to lead pivotal decisions for growth and innovation, undertaking projects in new disciplines without prior experience. Before making the shift, Saish says to uncover the origin of your interest in the legal business. This helps you identify potential doubts and adjust your mindset to prepare appropriately. If your drive is authentic, acquire skills, experience, and knowledge in sales by joining client pitches and attending networking events. Tune in to this episode of The Lawyer's Edge Podcast as Elise Holtzman sits down with Saish Setty, Parallaxes Capital's General Counsel, to talk about transitioning from BigLaw to the startup space. Saish addresses the functional and cultural differences between business and BigLaw, how a background as a private practice lawyer translates to a general counsel role, and investors' interest in TRAs.  

On this day in legal history in 1929, the Privy Council of the United Kingdom declared women officially “persons” under the laws of Canada. Which is good, that's a good thing to do, generally. People should be persons. On October 18, 1929, a landmark decision by the Privy Council of the United Kingdom fundamentally altered the legal status of women in Canada. On this day, the Privy Council overturned a ruling made by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Edwards v. Canada. The case was initiated by Emily Murphy, the first female magistrate in the British Empire, and four other women—Henrietta Muir Edwards, Irene Parlby, Louise McKinney, and Nellie McClung—who collectively came to be known as the Famous Five. A lawyer had challenged Murphy's right to preside over a court on the grounds that she wasn't a "person" under Canadian law, leading the Famous Five to challenge this narrow interpretation of the term "persons" as outlined in the British North America Acts, the governing laws of Canada at the time.The Supreme Court of Canada initially ruled against the Famous Five, upholding the traditional interpretation that excluded women from the definition of "persons." This decision mirrored societal prejudices that marginalized women, relegating them to domestic roles and barring them from public life. However, the Privy Council of the United Kingdom, which served as Canada's final court of appeal at the time, reversed this ruling. They declared that the exclusion of women from public offices was a "relic of days more barbarous than ours," offering a more progressive and inclusive interpretation.Lord Sankey, who delivered the Privy Council's judgment, questioned why the term "persons" should not include women, framing it as a matter of logical and moral imperative. This decision dramatically expanded the range of professional and public opportunities available to women in Canada and had ripple effects across the globe, inspiring movements for gender equality.Today, October 18 is celebrated as Persons Day in Canada, marking the victory of the Famous Five and commemorating the broader fight for gender equality. The decision serves as an enduring reminder for legal scholars, activists, and students about the power of the legal system to redefine societal norms and advance human rights.The issue of the state-and-local tax (SALT) deduction cap, instituted by the GOP in 2017, is becoming a contentious point in the upcoming elections, particularly for blue-state Republicans. The cap limited the SALT deduction to $10,000 and was initially opposed by several House Republicans from high-tax states. Although many of those opposing Republicans are no longer in office, a new batch of lawmakers from blue states is fighting to restore the full SALT deduction, albeit without success so far. This situation is giving Democrats an advantage, as candidates vow to make the removal of the SALT cap a priority if elected.Democrats' message that Republicans are responsible for a tax hike has resonated in previous elections and appears to be effective again. Republican representatives such as Mike Garcia of California have admitted that winning would be easier if their party agreed to lift the cap. The upcoming elections are critical for future tax policy discussions, as many elements of the 2017 tax law, including the SALT cap, are set to expire in 2025.By way of brief background, the SALT cap deduction refers to the limitation placed on the amount of state and local taxes (SALT) that can be deducted from a filer's federal income tax. Implemented as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, the cap is currently set at $10,000 for both single filers and married couples filing jointly. The SALT cap has been a point of debate, as it disproportionately affects taxpayers in states with higher income and property taxes–those states where more folks are likely to be exceeding $10,000 in property tax.Democrats have successfully used the SALT issue to gain an edge in previous elections, unseating Republicans who opposed the 2017 tax law due to the cap. Some candidates have characterized the 2017 law as a "weaponization of the tax code" against Democratic states. However, it's worth noting that not all Democrats are united in removing the cap. Progressive Democrats argue that the SALT deduction disproportionately benefits the wealthy and have resisted attempts to eliminate it from the Build Back Better legislation.Even as some Republican candidates try to align their party's stance with raising or eliminating the SALT cap, they face internal resistance. The issue has even stalled GOP efforts to pass tax bills, as some refuse to vote for any package that doesn't address the SALT cap. As it stands, the SALT cap issue remains a potent weapon for Democrats, particularly in high-tax states, and could significantly influence the electoral outcomes in the 2024 elections.SALT Cap Haunts GOP House Candidates as Democrats Turn TablesThe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has notably excluded environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing from its focus areas for 2024, a shift from previous years when it was listed as a priority. The agency's Division of Examinations priorities for the year did not make any direct mention of ESG, even though the topic was a key area of scrutiny in reports for 2021, 2022, and 2023. An SEC spokesperson clarified that the published priorities for 2024 are "not exhaustive" and other issues could still be addressed.This change comes as the SEC seems to be distancing itself from the ESG label in the context of corporate disclosures. An agency official mentioned that the commission is focusing more on "emergent risks" rather than using the ESG terminology. The label itself has come under scrutiny and has been politicized, leading companies like BlackRock and McDonald's to drop or downplay the term.For 2024, the SEC has shifted its focus to anti-money laundering controls, cryptocurrency, and cybersecurity. Despite this shift, it's worth noting that the SEC's Climate and ESG Task Force has been active in enforcement, settling cases with Goldman Sachs, Bank of New York Mellon, and Deutsche Bank over allegations of improper ESG investment claims and procedural failures. The SEC's deprioritizing of ESG in its 2024 exam priorities does not necessarily signal an abandonment of oversight in this area but indicates a shift in the regulatory landscape.SEC Drops ESG From List of Compliance Priorities in 2024Google has requested a California federal court to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging that the tech giant's data scraping activities for training its AI systems violate people's privacy and property rights. The company argues that using public data is essential for training AI technologies like its chatbot Bard. Google contends that the lawsuit could significantly harm not just its services but also the development of generative AI as a whole. The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco by eight unnamed individuals, accuses Google of improperly using content from social media and other Google platforms for AI training.The suit is part of a broader trend of legal complaints against tech companies for allegedly misusing various types of content, such as books, visual art, and personal data, for AI training without permission. Google's general counsel, Halimah DeLaine Prado, dismissed the lawsuit as "baseless," stating that U.S. law permits the use of public information to create new beneficial uses. She also refuted allegations that the company uses non-public information from services like Gmail for AI training without consent.The lawsuit covers a wide array of content, from photos on dating websites to Spotify playlists and TikTok videos. One plaintiff, described as a best-selling author and investigative journalist, claimed Google copied her book to train its chatbot. Google responded that such use falls under the fair use doctrine of copyright law and criticized the lawsuit for lacking specific details on how the plaintiffs were harmed.Google says data-scraping lawsuit would take 'sledgehammer' to generative AI | ReutersIn the ongoing fraud trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the now-bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX, defense lawyers are challenging the portrayal of the company's investments as "reckless and frivolous." This comes after testimony from Nishad Singh, FTX's former engineering chief, who described the company's spending on marketing and celebrity endorsements as excessive. Singh, who has pleaded guilty to fraud and is cooperating with prosecutors, testified that he thought FTX could survive despite a $13 billion shortfall in customer funds, a point that could support Bankman-Fried's defense.Bankman-Fried is in his third trial week, facing charges related to allegedly looting billions from FTX customer funds for various investments and political donations. He has pleaded not guilty. His lawyer, Mark Cohen, pressed Singh on the business benefits of marketing expenditures, potentially framing them as good-faith business decisions rather than fraud.Singh also testified about a deal FTX had with investment firm K5, which he had previously described as "toxic" for the company's culture. Cohen pointed out that K5 helped with more than just celebrity endorsements; it also assisted in investing in a tequila brand run by a celebrity. A lawsuit against K5 alleges that a Bankman-Fried-controlled company used $214 million in FTX funds to buy a stake in celebrity Kendall Jenner's 818 Tequila brand, valued at just $2.94 million at the time.Bankman-Fried's defense maintains that while he made mistakes in running FTX, he never intended to defraud anyone. Jurors have also heard from other former executives who have pleaded guilty to fraud and are cooperating with the prosecution. One significant point came when Singh acknowledged buying a $3.7 million home using FTX customer funds, stating he was "ashamed" and had agreed to forfeit the property as part of his plea agreement.Sam Bankman-Fried's lawyer says FTX investments were not 'reckless' | ReutersA California state judge has ruled that the $90 million legal dispute between Elon Musk and law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz should go to arbitration rather than be settled in court. Judge Richard Ulmer agreed with Wachtell's argument that both parties had "clearly and unmistakably" agreed to let an arbitrator decide on the claims subject to arbitration. Elon Musk, who renamed Twitter to X after acquiring it, had filed a lawsuit against Wachtell to recover $90 million in fees, accusing the law firm of receiving an "improper bonus payment" that violated its fiduciary and ethical duties.The judge's decision to compel arbitration was made without objection from either party, and the merits of Musk's claims were not addressed in this ruling. Wachtell, which represented Twitter in the acquisition deal, has denied Musk's allegations. A spokesperson for Wachtell declined to comment on the ruling, and attorneys for Musk did not immediately respond to requests for comment.In the lawsuit, Musk claimed that Twitter executives "ran up the tab" by designating large amounts of money as "success" or "project" fees for law firms involved in the deal. Musk argued that Wachtell unfairly profited from the transaction. In response, Wachtell stated that Twitter's board had approved their fee, arguing that they had facilitated a deal ensuring "billions in value for Twitter's stockholders." The case is known as X Corp v Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz in the San Francisco Superior Court.Elon Musk's Twitter fee fight with law firm Wachtell belongs in arbitration, judge says | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In our latest episode of Movers, Shakers & Rainmakers: The Biglaw Lateral Market, we dive deep into the intricate melding of recruitment, technology, and the legal industry with Michael Heise, CTO of haistack.ai. Enhanced by years of legal data and insights from Lateral Link and its expert team, Heise discusses how haistack.ai is meticulously crafted to boost the recruiting capabilities of law firms, aid in attorney retention, and proactively safeguard firms from potential lost profits. We probe the unique journey behind its creation, the challenges AI faces, and its transformative potential. And, as we always keep you updated, our hosts also highlight the latest legal shake-ups: Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz's high-profile partner acquisition from Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP and the notable attorney departures at Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP. As always, be sure to rate, review, subscribe and tell a friend!

Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard was controversially blocked in its original form by the UK Competition and Markets Authority. What was the CMA's rationale and how has the investigation played out since then? Bruce Kilpatrick, partner at Addleshaw Goddard LLP in London, joins Christina Ma and Matthew Hall to discuss the UK element of the worldwide merger control investigation into this case. Listen to this episode to learn more about the CMA's original investigation, the parties' appeal to the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, the CMA's review of an amended transaction and the future of behavioral remedies in the UK. With special guest: Bruce Kilpatrick, Partner, Addleshaw Goddard LLP Related Links: UK Competition and Markets Authority Microsoft/Activision Blizzard merger case page (original transaction) UK Competition and Markets Authority Microsoft/Activision Blizzard merger case page (amended transaction) European Commission press release Microsoft/Activision Blizzard merger clearance U.S. Federal Trade Commission press release challenge to Microsoft/Activision Blizzard merger Summary of appeal application at UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (original transaction) UK Competition Appeal Tribunal case page (original transaction) Hosted by: Christina Ma, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Matthew Hall, McGuireWoods London LLP

Bank failures in 2023 led to renewed interest in bank consolidation and debate over the role of antitrust in bank policy. But does this mean we can expect the DOJ Antitrust Division to change the way they are approaching bank mergers? Damian Didden, Partner at Wachtell, joins Jaclyn Phillips and Sergei Zaslavsky to explain the debate about bank consolidation and what we can glean from the Antitrust Division's statements about its approach to bank merger review. Tune in to learn more about whether you can bank on changes in this space. With special guest: Damian Didden, Partner, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz Related Links: Wachtell Comments on Revisions to the 1995 Banking Guidelines Wachtell Lipton Criticizes Putting Politics in Bank Merger Antitrust Policy Hosted by: Jaclyn Phillips, White & Case LLP and Sergei Zaslavsky, O'Melveny & Myers

Meet Emily Witt. Emily's journey is a unique blend of adventure and professional growth. Emily started as a legal recruiter at a Manhattan firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, learning the ropes of the legal profession. Emily's adaptability, assertiveness, and people skills made her stand out, and she became the go-to career advisor even among strangers. Her innate ability to connect with people eventually led her to become a legal recruiter.  Besides her career, she's a certified Pilates instructor and a passionate advocate for pursuing one's dreams and well-being. Emily on LinkedInEmily's podcast Beyond The Legal LensEmily's InstagramSupport the showFollow us on Instagram @theladieswholawpodcast

Liz and Andrew bring you a (mostly) Trump-free show discussing all things Twitter, including the recent sanctions imposed for failure to comply with a search warrant, a lawsuit against the former Twitter lawyers, and a truly oppressive lawsuit designed to deter a charity that's critical of... Elon Musk's policies.   NotesX v. Wachtell, Complaint https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/dwvkdolbxpm/X%20Corp%20v%20Wachtell%20-%2020230705.pdf X v. CCDH Amended Complaint https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.416212/gov.uscourts.cand.416212.10.0.pdf July 20, 2023 X Cease and Desist letter to CCDH https://counterhate.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/07.20.2023-Letter-to-Imran-Ahmed.pdf Twitter search warrant trial transcript https://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/23sc31%20Attachment%20A%20-%20Documents%20unsealed%20with%20redactions.pdf New York Times reporting on hate speech on Twitter https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/technology/twitter-hate-speech.html CCDH, Toxic Twitter https://counterhate.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Toxic-Twitter_FINAL.pdf -Support us on Patreon: https://www.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

On this day in legal history, August 16, 1918, Lothar Witzke was convicted of espionage in the United States on behalf of Germany and became the first German spy convicted during World War I. Lothar Witzke was a junior officer in the German Imperial Navy during World War I, who became a spy and saboteur in the United States and Mexico. After escaping internment in Chile, he reached San Francisco in 1916 and began sabotage activities with another agent, Kurt Jahnke. They were involved in various missions, including suspected connections to significant explosions, though later investigations ruled out their involvement in some cases. Witzke was arrested in 1918 near the Mexican border, convicted, and sentenced to death, but his sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by President Woodrow Wilson. After an act of heroism in prison and diplomatic pressure from Germany, he was pardoned and released by President Calvin Coolidge in 1923. Upon his return to Germany, Witzke was decorated with the Iron Cross and later served in the Abwehr, or German military intelligence, during World War II. After the war, he became a member of the Hamburg Parliament, representing the German Party from 1949 to 1952.Donald Trump may have a 40 point lead ahead of DeSantis in the GOP primary, and Chris Christie may have overtaken the Florida governor in early New Hampshire polling, but among one demographic DeSantis seems to have the edge over all other Republican candidates–lawyers. According to a report by Bloomberg Law, Ron DeSantis has a significant advantage over Donald Trump in campaign donations from lawyers, leading with a 6-to-1 ratio. As of the end of June, DeSantis had received over $1.3 million from individual lawyer contributions, compared to just under $200,000 for Trump. DeSantis's background includes a Harvard Law School education and time as a U.S. Navy lawyer, while Trump has been known to criticize and even sue attorneys. Many larger law firms seem uncomfortable supporting Trump, contributing to DeSantis's advantage.DeSantis's fundraising from lawyers has also surpassed other GOP primary candidates, including former Governor Nikki Haley and Senator Tim Scott. His campaign haul includes significant contributions from elite law firms like Sullivan & Cromwell. DeSantis's support in Republican legal circles also includes several high-ranking Trump Justice Department officials and lawyers from Jones Day.While DeSantis leads in lawyer contributions, he still trails Trump by double digits in state and national polls. Some political analysts question whether DeSantis's momentum will continue, especially as his campaign has faced staff shakeups and strategy shifts. Meanwhile, Trump's campaign, powered by small-dollar donors, has raised over $50 million between January and June. Contributions from the legal industry have historically favored Democrats, with President Joe Biden out-raising DeSantis among lawyers so far this year with $1.5 million.DeSantis Crushes Trump in Cash from Lawyers Seeking AlternativeDavis Polk & Wardwell, a prominent law firm, has signed a 25-year lease extension to expand its Midtown headquarters in Manhattan, adding 30,000 square feet to its current space at 450 Lexington Ave. This deal increases the firm's footprint to 700,000 square feet, making it the largest commercial space leased in New York City in 2023, as announced by the building's landlord RXR Realty. The firm's managing partner, Neil Barr, emphasized that the expansion reflects the firm's growth strategy.Davis Polk has been proactive in moving back to in-office work after the pandemic and is requiring its lawyers and business services personnel to be in the office Monday through Thursday after Labor Day. The building, located near Grand Central Terminal, will undergo a $300 million renovation, including private outdoor terraces for Davis Polk and new gathering spaces.The firm's lease renewal comes amid a challenging time for Manhattan's commercial real estate market, with available office space reaching an all-time high in the second quarter of 2023. Financial and legal services have dominated the leasing transactions, with Davis Polk's lease being a significant highlight. Other law firms like Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, Paul Hastings, and Sheppard Mullin have also renewed or expanded their New York footprints this quarter.Davis Polk Inks Manhattan's Biggest Office Lease of 2023 (1)A Delaware judge has ruled that the fair value of Pivotal Software Inc.'s shares at the time of its 2019 go-private merger with VMWare Inc. was $14.83 per share. This ruling came in an appraisal suit brought by Pivotal's former investors, who argued that the shares should have been worth $20, while Pivotal sought a valuation closer to $12. Chancellor Kathaleen St. J. McCormick arrived at the fair value figure by averaging two valuation methods suggested by the parties. The court's decision also clarified that the deal price does not provide a cap on fair value, emphasizing the importance of strong procedural protections for minority stockholders.Ex-Pivotal Investors Lose $20 Share Valuation Bid in VMWare DealThe American Bar Association (ABA) is considering a new rule that may require law schools to adopt free speech policies. This change comes after several incidents where students disrupted controversial speakers on campuses. The ABA's Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar will consider a rule mandating "written policies that encourage and support the free expression of ideas." Schools would develop their own policies, but they must protect the rights of faculty, staff, and students to communicate controversial ideas and ensure robust debate.The proposed rule emphasizes that becoming an effective advocate requires learning civil discourse, even in disagreement, and that concerns about civility should not justify barring controversial discussions. While ABA's law school standards have covered academic freedom for faculty, this proposal would be the first to address free speech for the entire law school community.Prominent U.S. law schools have faced criticism for handling student protests against conservative speakers, leading to apologies and mandated free speech training at institutions like Stanford. Yale Law School also strengthened its commitment to free speech after disruptive incidents. The proposed rule would allow restrictions on unlawful expression, defamatory speech, threats, harassment, or unjustifiable invasions of privacy, and would enable reasonable regulation of the time and manner of expression. The council is set to vote on Friday on whether to send the proposed rule for public notice and comment, and further revisions are anticipated.ABA weighs new free speech rule for law schools | ReutersA federal appeals court has refused to revive a lawsuit by longtime umpire Angel Hernandez, who accused Major League Baseball (MLB) of racial discrimination. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan rejected Hernandez's arguments in a 3-0 decision, stating that the league's promotion practices, including its failure to promote him to crew chief, did not reflect unfair treatment of minorities. Hernandez, an MLB umpire since 1993, claimed he had been discriminated against after being passed over for crew chief five times between 2011 and 2018. He also cited a "history of animosity" with Joe Torre, MLB's chief baseball officer at the time of the lawsuit. The court found that Hernandez failed to show a statistically significant disparity in promotion rates, despite a "bottom-line imbalance" between white and minority crew chiefs. It also rejected Hernandez's claim that the judge erred in accepting MLB's reasons for not promoting him, which included a missed call and an "overly confrontational style." The court upheld the March 2021 dismissal of the lawsuit, and lawyers for Hernandez did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In 2020, MLB named its first black and Hispanic crew chiefs born outside the United States.Major League Baseball umpire loses appeal of discrimination lawsuit | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Welcome back to the Law School Toolbox podcast! Today, we're joined by Emily Witt -- a legal recruiter who worked at Wachtell for many years -- to talk about about BigLaw recruiting, summer programs, going in-house, and more. In this episode we discuss: Emily's background and path to the legal recruiting field Tips for approaching the OCI process Post-law firm options in litigation and corporate law How to leverage a clerkship in the job market What types of skills do people need to be successful as a large firm or an in-house lawyer? How to start working with a legal recruiter Resources: CareerDicta (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/careerdicta/) Getting a Legal Job (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/law-school-toolbox-podcast-archive/careers/#podcast-getting-job) Emily Witt – Linkedin (https://www.linkedin.com/in/emilywittslegalpath/) Emily Witt – Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/beyondthelegallens/) Beyond the Legal Lens podcast (https://beyondthelegallens.libsyn.com/) Whistler Partners (https://www.whistlerpartners.com/home-page) Podcast Episode 393: The Legal Hiring Landscape in the Current Economy (w/Sadie Jones) (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-393-the-legal-hiring-landscape-in-the-current-economy-w-sadie-jones/) Download the Transcript  (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/episode-411-a-conversation-with-legal-recruiter-emily-witt/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/law-school-toolbox-podcast/id1027603976) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Law School Toolbox website (http://lawschooltoolbox.com/contact). If you're concerned about the bar exam, check out our sister site, the Bar Exam Toolbox (http://barexamtoolbox.com/). You can also sign up for our weekly podcast newsletter (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/get-law-school-podcast-updates/) to make sure you never miss an episode! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee

Emily Witt is the Managing Director of Whistler Partners, a matchmaking firm focused on counseling leading attorneys in their careers. In her role, she facilitates women's advancements in tech, healthcare advocacy, and life sciences. With over 20 years of industry experience, Emily has served as a legal recruiter at one of the world's most preeminent law firms and now brings her expertise and advice to the agency side of the profession. Emily began her legal recruiting career as a Senior Recruiting Coordinator at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, where she worked alongside some of the most admirable attorneys in the country. At Wachtell, she became the designated career professional, advising associates on role progression.  Emily's legal recruiting approach involves connecting with attorneys and guiding them to follow their instincts when making decisions. As a naturally skilled professional matchmaker, she counsels and encourages women to pursue their dream careers.  In this episode… With so much volatility in the job market, law firms and in-house legal departments have become even pickier about their hiring standards. Whether you are looking for a role as a private practice lawyer or are interested in going in-house, it's critical that you understand the hiring landscape and prepare yourself to stand out from a crowded marketplace for legal talent. As you evaluate your options, how can you prepare to transition into your dream career? Seasoned legal recruiter Emily Witt recognizes business priorities and attorneys' professional demands. Emerging lawyers often begin their careers in-house, where they're required to possess agility, leadership skills, and the ability to communicate clearly and succinctly. Conversely, law firms value culture and professional growth, making these environments more attractive to experienced attorneys. When making this shift, Emily says to embellish your skill sets, research the firm, and assess your value proposition. You can also leverage legal recruiters to attain your career goals. In today's episode of The Lawyer's Edge Podcast, Elise Holtzman interviews Emily Witt, a Managing Director of legal recruiting firm Whistler Partners, who shares advice on how lawyers can best position themselves to succeed in a job search. Emily describes the different skills law firms and in-house legal departments look for in candidates, how to evaluate legal recruiters, and how to consider job opportunities.

It has been over a year since I finally left the legal recruiting business to focus exclusively on coaching.  Since the market has changed a lot since early 2022, I thought this would be a good time to invite someone who is still in the business to talk about the state of legal hiring.  I also thought this would be a good time to revisit the topic of legal recruiting in general and who can benefit from working with a recruiter. Emily Witt is a legal recruiter with over 20 years of experience. She began her career as an in-house recruiter for Wachtell, Lipton in New York. In 2016, she moved over to the agency side and today, she places attorneys in both law firm and in-house position.  In particular, she enjoys focusing on women's advancement in both tech and healthcare. Emily hosts the podcast, Beyond the Legal Lens, that helps open the door to jobs in tech and health law. She also has a platform, the Advocate's Mic, that highlights mission-driven attorneys who are creating impactful initiatives in their communities. Emily shares her wisdom on the state of legal hiring in 2023 and offers some tips about working with a recruiter.

On this day in history, July 19 1911, the first state law in the US allowing for censorship of movies was passed in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania State Board of Censors, established on July 19, 1911, under P.L. 1067 by Governor John Kinley Tener, was the first such organization in the United States and was renowned for its stringency. The Board's main responsibility was to review all films before they were released in Pennsylvania, approving only those that met moral standards and rejecting films deemed corruptive. Although the board was funded in 1913, it wasn't until 1914 that the first board members were appointed by Governor Tener. P.L. 534, enacted on May 15, 1915, expanded the board's size from two to twenty-two members. The board, which had fluctuating staff numbers throughout its history, had offices in Philadelphia, Harrisburg, and Pittsburgh, with most of the film screenings occurring in Philadelphia, fiscal supervision in Harrisburg, and film approval seals distribution in Pittsburgh.The State Censorship Board required that all movies intended for review be accompanied by their respective scripts, and affidavits confirming the authenticity of translations had to be provided for foreign films. The Board's standards, as per Section twenty-two, dictated that the film's marketing material should adhere to the same criteria as the film itself. The State Archives records, encompassing the fiscal years of 1935 through 1949, demonstrate that the Pennsylvania State Board of Censors assessed a sum of 24,235 movies during this timeframe. Concurrently, the Board mandated modifications in 2,226 unique films and prohibited the screening of seventy-six films completely.Prominent Wall Street law firm, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, recently saw two of its corporate attorneys, Sabastian Niles and Gordon Moodie, depart to take up roles in-house. Salesforce.com Inc. announced the appointment of Sabastian Niles as its new chief legal officer. Niles had previously advised Salesforce in negotiations with Elliott Investment Management LP, an activist investor that acquired a significant stake in the software company. Gordon Moodie has moved to AI startup Harvey as the chief product officer. Harvey, which is bringing artificial intelligence to the legal industry, has secured $21 million in investment funding. This follows another high-profile departure from Wachtell earlier this year, when Andrea Wahlquist Brown joined Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. Wachtell expressed support for Moodie's new venture and was pleased about Niles's recognition by Salesforce, a long-valued client.Wachtell Partners Take Jobs at Salesforce, AI Startup Harvey (1)Universities are fighting against a 1.4% tax on their large endowments, a battle expected to intensify as the focus on legacy admissions intensifies in Congress. The endowment tax, targeting over two dozen schools with substantial endowments per student, was implemented by Republicans in 2017 as a method to fund tax cuts. However, the recent Supreme Court ruling ending race-based affirmative action may give new momentum to proposals aiming to modify this tax, with the goal of supporting low-income students and targeting wealthy universities with exclusive admission practices. The issue of legacy programs has been criticized by both Republicans and Democrats, providing potential ground for bipartisan cooperation to amend the tax law. This coincides with the expiration of provisions from the 2017 tax law, creating an opportunity to review this and other related provisions. Lawmakers are considering various proposals, from increasing the tax to phasing it out for universities that support low-income students. Over a dozen universities have already reported lobbying on this issue. However, any movement on this issue is expected to take time.Endowment Tax Eyed After Supreme Court Affirmative Action RulingHarvard and other wealthy Massachusetts schools with legacy admissions hit with tax proposal that would raise hundreds of millionsVisa Inc. and Mastercard Inc. are facing an antitrust lawsuit, lodged by Block Inc. (previously Square Inc.), over allegedly inflating credit card interchange fees. The suit, filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, claims that the two card companies conspired to maintain market power by imposing elevated fees on the Square payment platform. Square contracts directly with Visa and Mastercard to handle transactions for millions of merchants, and it is the direct payer of these fees. Block argues that these inflated fees have resulted in increased retail prices paid by consumers. In addition to this, Block claims that Visa and Mastercard have raised a complex and unavoidable fee that Square pays, based on the number of a merchant's locations. Square merchants, however, pay separate fees for payment services and not the interchange fees. Visa and Mastercard have yet to respond to the allegations.Visa, Mastercard Hit With Antitrust Suit Over Credit Card FeesSenate Democrats are championing a bill aiming to establish a binding ethics code for U.S. Supreme Court justices following reports that some conservative justices have failed to disclose certain financial transactions and luxurious trips. Unlike their counterparts in the federal judiciary, the Supreme Court's nine justices are not bound by any formal code of conduct. Proposed by Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, the bill mandates new requirements for financial disclosures and recusals in case of potential conflicts of interest. Criticizing the court for its inability to self-regulate, Democrats argue that Supreme Court justices should be held to the same standard as all federal judges. However, the bill faces a challenging path to approval in the Senate and the Republican-led House of Representatives. Meanwhile, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have interpreted the ethics reform as an attempt to tarnish the court's reputation and believe it should continue to set its own rules. The legislation would also introduce a mechanism to investigate alleged violations of the code of conduct.US Senate Democrats pursue Supreme Court ethics legislation | ReutersIn the least surprising news this week Former U.S. President Donald Trump disclosed that he has been named a target of a grand jury investigation into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election result. This represents the strongest indication yet that Trump might face federal criminal charges concerning his actions following his election loss to Joe Biden. The investigation pertains to Trump's attempts to remain in power, which include alleged pressuring of officials with false claims of voter fraud and an attack on the U.S. Capitol by his supporters. Despite his potential legal troubles, Trump remains the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. A series of related criminal investigations into Trump and his allies are also underway, with Michigan's Attorney General announcing charges against 16 Trump supporters. Additionally, Trump is facing criminal charges for retaining national security documents unlawfully after his term. Trump has consistently dismissed these investigations as politically motivated.Trump says he is a target in US 2020 election probe | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The credit card industry has been the subject of increased antitrust scrutiny in recent years, even as consumer understanding of its inner workings remains low. But how did the American credit card system come to be, and are there changes for it on the horizon? Doug Kantor, General Counsel of the National Association of Convenience Stores, speaks with Christina Ma and Matt Reynolds about the history of credit and debit card payment systems, the “swipe fees” on which those systems are built, and the justifications offered over the years for those fees. Tune in to learn more about the development of card payment systems in the United States and the antitrust considerations that continue to influence their development even today. With special guest: Doug Kantor, General Counsel, National Association of Convenience Stores Related Links: https://www.convenience.org/Advocacy/Issues/SwipeFees  https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/1838  Hosted by: Christina Ma, Partner, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Matthew Reynolds, Partner, Huth Reynolds LLP

What does Elon Musk's latest lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court reveal? Alot! The detailed lawsuit (and its many non-redacted internal emails and other exhibits) more fully disclose the profit model of powerhouse New York law firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.  Elon Musk's Twitter acquisition company's suit seeks equitable "disgorgement" of the alleged $90M in "excessive legal fees" charged to and paid by Twitter's previous (now all fired) management and "approved" by its previous (now all resigned) board members.  How did this happen?  The “re-negotiated” fee agreement (setting the “multipler” on hourly fees to $90M (or over $100K/billable hour for less than six months of work that resulted in no trial, no appeal, and no substantive judicial decisions was finalized the day before the closing of the settlement Musk agreed to conclude after first refusing to do so. Is the timing alone enough for Musk to void the new fee agreement or will both sides consider some form of Creative Dispute Resolution? Today host Jack Russo and Professor Rafael Chodos discuss if Creativity Over Controversy®️ techniques could help both parties reach an amicable resolution. See: www.FFCDR.com  

On this day in history, in 1787, the Congress of the Confederation, the body operating under the Articles of Confederation and precursor to the United States Congress, passed the Northwest Ordinance. The Northwest Ordinance, officially titled "An Ordinance for the Government of the Territory of the United States, North-West of the River Ohio," was an act passed by the Confederation Congress of the United States on July 13, 1787. This legislative act created a structured process for territories to evolve into states, outlining the path from political wilderness to full statehood. The ordinance addressed the territories that had been obtained from Great Britain after the Revolutionary War through the 1783 Treaty of Paris, namely the region north of the Ohio River, east of the Mississippi River, and south of the Great Lakes.On July 13, 1787, the Confederation Congress established this ordinance which served as a prototype for the incorporation of future U.S. territories. The Northwest Ordinance is considered one of the most impactful elements of the Articles of Confederation era because it set forth a policy for the orderly expansion of the United States across North America.The ordinance provided for the political and civil rights of the inhabitants and banned slavery in the territories. Additionally, it declared that the new states would enter the Union "on an equal footing with the original States," which was a profound statement of democratic principle – if you view the democratic distribution of someone else's land as true democracy. The ordinance led to the creation of five states: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Thus, the Northwest Ordinance was a foundational policy that shaped the way the U.S. grew and expanded in its early years.Northwest Ordinance (1787) | National ArchivesDaugherty Lordan, a law firm established after a mass departure from Lewis Brisbois, has been facing a series of exits after its leaders were removed due to past racist, sexist, and antisemitic emails. Over 30 people, including a name partner Joseph Lordan, have left the firm. Lordan has joined O'Hagan Meyer as co-managing partner of the San Francisco office, and five other former partners and twenty employees from Daugherty Lordan have also shifted to O'Hagan Meyer.The situation at Daugherty Lordan echoes the turbulence that occurred at Lewis Brisbois when nearly 140 attorneys left to form the new firm. These changes have led to questions about Daugherty Lordan's future and the need for possible rebranding. The firm had already undergone a name change in June after co-founders John Barber and Jeff Ranen were ousted when their inappropriate emails were released.Lewis Brisbois disclosed the offending emails, some dating back more than a decade, sent from Barber and Ranen's work accounts. Additional exits include attorneys shifting to Freeman Mathis & Gary, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, and Ogletree Deakins. Lewis Brisbois has noted some attorneys have returned to the firm but declined to provide specific numbers.Lewis Brisbois Defector Firm Sees Exits After Racist Emails (1)Elon Musk's recent lawsuit against law firm Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz over the Twitter Inc. acquisition brings to light the increasing use of success fees by law firms for handling critical deals. Wachtell, known for its handling of transactions and litigation like an investment bank, is being sued by Twitter's parent company, X Corp, for an alleged "unjust enrichment" through a $90 million payment. Musk's lawsuit, filed on July 5 in the San Francisco Superior Court, seeks restitution of these funds.Success fees, which are increasingly favored by clients wary of law firms overcharging or unnecessarily expanding work, are growing in popularity in the legal industry. Such a fee model has been especially adopted by large corporations and major companies disillusioned with hourly billings. Wachtell is renowned for its pioneering use of success fees, having one of the highest profits per equity partner in the industry and often linking its fees to the success of the deals it handles.The suit highlights Wachtell's billing practices, with the firm often receiving fees comparable to 60-80% of those paid to investment advisors. Despite the $90 million fee being a minute fraction of the $44 billion Musk paid for Twitter, Bruce MacEwen, a law firm consultant, argues that the value provided was reasonable. Wachtell has faced similar litigation in the past, but has maintained its stance that in certain cases, charging by the hour makes little sense and that their fees are not necessarily based on the amount involved in a matter.Musk Suit Against Wachtell Hits Pioneering Use of Success FeesThe U.S. Senate has confirmed Tiffany Cartwright, a civil rights lawyer, as one of the country's youngest federal judges. Born in 1985, Cartwright will join the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, a position left vacant by Judge Benjamin Hale who semi-retired in 2020. This confirmation, along with that of Kymberly Evanson, means President Joe Biden has now appointed all active judges in the Western District. Including Cartwright, Biden has appointed several judges under 40 years old. Some critics, largely Republicans, have expressed concerns over the age and limited legal experience of Biden's appointees.Cartwright, a civil rights lawyer and former public defender, has had a different career path to the judiciary than many others. Several groups have endorsed her nomination, emphasizing her diverse experiences and commendable litigation and trial skills. Also, Myong Joun, a Boston municipal court Judge, was up for a vote of confirmation. If confirmed, he would be the first Asian-American man to serve as a federal judge in Massachusetts. The Congressional Black Caucus expressed concerns over the nomination of two other candidates, Brandon Long and Jerry Edwards, criticizing a lack of meaningful participation in the selection process.Senate Confirms One of Judiciary's Youngest Trial Court JudgesU.S. prosecutors and IRS agents are pursuing investigations into wealthy individuals suspected of illicitly exploiting Puerto Rico's tax breaks. The island has used significant incentives to attract wealthy Americans over the past decade, but authorities are now scrutinizing whether individuals have falsified their residency duration and income sources. Professionals who promoted the tax program are also under investigation. Prosecutors are considering charges of conspiracy and wire fraud, and two criminal investigations could result in charges soon.Since 2012, over 5,000 Americans have qualified for incentives that exempt them from federal income tax and taxes on dividends, interest, and capital gains. Yet, lawyers indicate that the residency requirements are stringent, leading some to cheat. To qualify, individuals must stay on the island at least 183 days a year and demonstrate a closer connection to Puerto Rico than the U.S.The tax incentives have attracted many investors, including those from the crypto sector. However, local residents argue that these wealthy Americans are escalating real estate prices and paying fewer taxes than native Puerto Ricans. As a result, local legislation is underway that could revamp the incentives.IRS Preparing Criminal Cases Against Tax Cheats in Puerto Rico Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Between threatening Facebook and suing Wachtell, the Chief Twit is pretty active. We also talk about the end of the Supreme Court Term and the struggles in bar prep. ------ Elon Musk is desperately seeking a win and if he can't get it in a cage match against Mark Zuckerberg, he'll try his hand in court. Spoiler: it's going to go just about as badly. He's sent a legal threat to Facebook that fails to articulate much in the way of a legal issue and now he's suing Wachtell for being the lawyers that forced him to buy the company in the first place. Meanwhile the Supreme Court Term ended in a blaze of gaslighting and a hail of disingenuous spin. And now law schools are facing legal threats if their student body looks diverse. Finally, bar prep is just a little bit more stressful for students prepping with Themis, which continues to suffer website problems in the critical weeks before the exam.

Between threatening Facebook and suing Wachtell, the Chief Twit is pretty active. We also talk about the end of the Supreme Court Term and the struggles in bar prep. ------ Elon Musk is desperately seeking a win and if he can't get it in a cage match against Mark Zuckerberg, he'll try his hand in court. Spoiler: it's going to go just about as badly. He's sent a legal threat to Facebook that fails to articulate much in the way of a legal issue and now he's suing Wachtell for being the lawyers that forced him to buy the company in the first place. Meanwhile the Supreme Court Term ended in a blaze of gaslighting and a hail of disingenuous spin. And now law schools are facing legal threats if their student body looks diverse. Finally, bar prep is just a little bit more stressful for students prepping with Themis, which continues to suffer website problems in the critical weeks before the exam.

David M. Adlerstein is counsel in the Corporate Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. His practice focuses on mergers and acquisitions, capital-raising transactions, corporate governance, and other corporate and securities law matters, with a focus on financial institutions and technology transactions. He is a member of the Firm's Crypto Team and frequently writes and speaks about blockchain technology, cryptocurrencies and smart contracts. Kevin Schwartz is a partner in the Litigation Department of Wachtell Lipton and serves on the Executive Committee of the New York City Bar Association, where he was previously Chair of the Judiciary Committee, and is also a Visiting Lecturer in Law at Yale Law School. Mr. Schwartz's practice includes corporate, commercial, and securities litigation at both the trial and appellate levels, as well as a variety of regulatory and corporate governance matters that include leading the firm's specialized Crypto Team to address rapidly changing issues generated by the crypto asset industry.  Show highlights: [3:00] David and Kevin's introduction to crypto [14:00] Evolution of the legal side of digital assets [24:30] The merits of decentralization [33:00] Tornado Cash [41:00] Smart contracts [47:00] NFTs & much more. Disclaimer: Jacob Robinson and his guests are not your lawyer. Nothing herein or mentioned on the Law of Code podcast should be construed as legal advice. The material published is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only. Please seek the advice of counsel, and do not apply any of the generalized material to your individual facts or circumstances without speaking to an attorney.

Wachtell's Ryan McLeod talks about clerking for Bill Chandler, working as a litigator in Delaware and the most important corporate law issues facing the state's courts.

0:00 -- Intro.3:45 -- Start of interview.5:09 -- Leo's "origin story".  His focus on public service, and work for then Delaware Governor (now U.S. Senator) Tom Carper.9:41 -- On his time at Skadden's Wilmington office.11:52 -- On his time at the Delaware Court of Chancery and as Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court. 15:32-- His views on the evolution (and strengths) of the Delaware Court of Chancery. Its symbiosis with the SEC. "The courts in Delaware are not infected by partisanship." "Our brand is everything." "Delaware is not a tax haven."24:40 -- On companies leaving Delaware or the US (via inversions). "We do not impede the flow of capital."28:34 -- Why he wrote his new paper "Good Corporate Citizenship We Can All Get Behind?: Toward A Principled, Non-Ideological Approach To Making Money The Right Way." (December 7, 2022). 78 Bus. Law. 329 (2023), "The old word for ESG was CSR, this is not a new debate." "ESG is a proxy for good corporate citizenship, it's about making money the right way."38:28 -- His proposed Model of Good, Non-Ideological Corporate Citizenship.  "Make money without making harm". Reference to paper "Companies Should Maximize Shareholder Welfare Not Market Value" by Hart & Zingales. 44:49 -- On corporate political spending. "Corporate law has often policed conflict transactions." The role of the board in this process. The function of independent directors. Jack Bogle: "Institutional investors should insist that the proxy statement of each company in which they invest contain the following: Resolved: That the corporation shall make no political contributions without the approval of the holders of at least 75 percent of its shares outstanding.” "Citizens United is sort of a white whale of mine." "I would like to see Profs Lucian Bebchuk, Rob Jackson and Frank Partnoy push shareholder proposals to curb corporate political spending."58:16 -- On institutional investors' role (and challenges) in corporate governance. "I don't like the fact that [large asset managers] may be trying to escape their responsibility by passing through the voting." "With power should come responsibility."1:08:27 -- The complexity of climate change discourse: "actuaries and scientists agree on this problem." "Thanksgiving dinner behavior needs to be where we are on the business community."1:12:03 --  The books that have greatly influenced his life: Down and Out in Paris and London, by George Orwell (1933)Road to Wigan Pier, by George Orwell (1937)Simple books that his parents gave him when he was a child.1:14:30 --  His mentors, and what he learned from them: The two judges that he clerked for, Rod Ward (founder and longtime leader of Skadden's Wilmington office), Senator Tom Carper, his colleagues at the Delaware Chancery Court, Marty Lipton, Bob Clark and Michael Wachter, his wife.1:18:30 -- Quotes he thinks of often or lives his life by: "Clown time is over." (Elvis Costello). "Be yourself, unless of course you are an asshole, in which case be someone else."1:20:23 --   An unusual habit or an absurd thing that he loves: Lyrics. "I have stuck in my head pretty much every pop song of the 1970s" ("life is stuck in two decades: for me, it's the 1970s and the 1990s"). 1:23:13 --   The living person he most admires: the people who do the hardest jobs with no public glory. Leo E Strine, Jr. is Of Counsel in the Corporate Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.  Prior to joining the firm, he was the Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court from early 2014 through late 2019.  Before becoming the Chief Justice, he served on the Delaware Court of Chancery as Chancellor since June 22, 2011, and as a Vice Chancellor since November 9, 1998.__ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__You can join as a Patron of the Podcast at:Patreon: patreon.com/BoardroomGovernancePod__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Section 230 generally shields online platforms from liability for third-party content. It has been widely credited with enabling the growth of the internet, but to what extent does it apply to the latest disruptive technology --- generative AI? Jess Miers, Legal Advocacy Counsel at the Chamber of Progress, discusses the applicability of Section 230 to generative AI with hosts Christina Ma and Sergei Zaslavsky. Listen to this episode to learn about arguments for and against applying Section 230 to generative AI, and what features of generative AI will likely be key to determining the scope of Section 230 protection. With special guest: Jess Miers, Legal Advocacy Counsel, Chamber of Progress Related Links: Matt Pereault, Section 230 Won't Protect ChatGPT, Lawfare  Jess Miers, Yes, Section 230 Should Protect ChatGPT And Other Generative AI Tools, Techdirt Henderson v. The Source for Public Data Fourth Circuit Opinion Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommates.com Ninth Circuit Opinion Hosted by: Sergei Zaslavsky, O'Melveny & Myers and Christina Ma, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz

David Lat joins Robert to discuss the student protest at Stanford Law School over a recent visit by Fed Soc invitee U.S. Circuit Judge Kyle Duncan. Recordings and documents referenced during the episode:Recording of the protest and Judge Duncan's reactionStanford Law Dean Martinez's letterJudge Duncan's op-ed in the WSJDEI Dean Steinbach's op-ed in the WSJUC Berkley School of Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky on MSNBC's Morning JoeCheck out David's substack, Original Jurisdiction, and his podcast by the same name. Follow David on Twitter and LinkedIn. David Lat is a lawyer turned writer. Prior to launching Original Jurisdiction, David founded Above the Law, one of the nation's most widely read legal news websites, and Underneath Their Robes, a popular blog about federal judges that he wrote under a pseudonym. He is also the author of a novel set in the world of the federal courts, Supreme Ambitions. Before entering the media world, David had a prolific legal career as a federal prosecutor in Newark, New Jersey; a litigation associate at Wachtell in New York; and a law clerk to Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. David graduated from Harvard College and Yale Law School, where he served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal.Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast's advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast's creator is prohibited.

The 2023 Appropriations Act included three antitrust laws dealing with merger fees, merger subsidy disclosure, and venue. What are the implications of these laws? Laura Alexander joins hosts Christina Ma and Jaclyn Phillips to discuss what these laws do, how we got them, and whether we may see substantive antitrust reform in the future. Listen to this episode to learn more about how we finally saw antitrust bills become laws. With special guest: Laura Alexander, Washington Center for Equitable Growth Related Links: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023  The Merger Filing Fee Modernization Act is a down payment on the future of antitrust enforcement Restoring competition in the United States The state of U.S. federal antitrust enforcement Hosted by: Christina Ma, Partner, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz and Jaclyn Phillips, Associate, White & Case LLP

To be a good value investor, you must be a good credit analyst.   Over the years, I learned so much from the many investors I've met through Heilbrunn. I've shamelessly incorporated these ideas and insights into my lecture notes and the curriculum. Today's guest is one such person.   Mitch Julis has had a disproportionately large impact on both my thinking and the program design. Now he joins me for a conversation about the rich interactions between the nature of the firm's business operation and the liability side of the balance sheet.   Mitchell R. Julis is the Co-Founder, Co-Chairman, and Co-Chief Executive Officer of Canyon Partners, LLC. Mitch is a graduate of the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University, Harvard Law School, and Harvard Business School. He received an honorary doctorate from Yeshiva University of New York in 2011. Before forming Canyon, Mitch directed a group of professionals responsible for a distressed and special situation securities portfolio at Drexel Burnham Lambert. He was a bankruptcy and creditors' rights attorney at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz in New York.   In this episode, Mitch and I discuss his journey from Bronx to Beverly Hills, the juxtaposition of accounting and accountability, why increasing spending power can undermine our federal system of competition, the four P's of understanding governance, Mitch's accidental entry into restructuring and bankruptcy law, arbitrage opportunities that arise in distressed situations, his approach to risk assessment, and so much more!     Key Topics:   Welcome Mitch to the show (0:39) Mitch's rich childhood in the Bronx (3:14) The journey to Princeton and Mitch's goal to go to the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (9:35) The juxtaposition of accounting and accountability (15:47) Why increasing spending power can undermine our federal system of competition (18:09) How the four P's of understanding governance play out in real-world situations (23:58) Mitch's accidental entry into restructuring and bankruptcy law (29:31) Challenging the Countryman definition of executory contract at Harvard Law (33:12) Mitch's unexpected career moves (35:39) How Mitch's time at Drexel shifted his thinking about financial markets (38:30) Exploring arbitrage opportunities that arise in distressed situations (42:05) Using accounting to its maximum potential when modeling the evolution of the balance sheet (49:09) Insights from Canyon's statement of changes in net financial obligations (50:09) Chapter 11 escape holes and loopholes created by the private equity world (54:49) Mitch's approach to risk assessment (57:08) How the next financial crisis will play out (1:03:50) What keeps Mitch up at night with worry? (1:11:08) Mitch's movie recommendations (1:15:14) Embracing a continuous learning mindset with humility (1:18:29) And much more!     Mentioned in this Episode:   Canyon Partners Richard E. Neustadt's Book | Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan Philip Hamburger's Book | Purchasing Submission: Conditions, Power, and Freedom Freddie Gershon's Book | Sweetie Baby Cookie Honey: A Novel Sujeet Indap & Max Frumes'Book | The Caesars Palace Coup: How a Billionaire Brawl Over the Famous Casino Exposed the Corruption of the Private Equity Industry The Offer on Paramount Plus Rabbi Benjamin Blech's Article | Bernie & The Godfather Spirited on Apple TV     Thanks for Listening!   Be sure to subscribe on Apple, Google, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And feel free to drop us a line at valueinvesting@gsb.columbia.edu.   Follow the Heilbrunn Center on social media on Instagram, LinkedIn, and more!

In November 2022, the FTC issued a policy statement concerning the scope and meaning of unfair methods of competition under Section 5 of the FTC Act. So what has changed under Section 5 and where are we headed? Angela Landry, counsel at Freshfields, joins Christina Ma and Jaclyn Phillips to discuss Section 5, how the FTC's approach has changed with its 2022 statement, and what we might see as it gets put into practice. With special guest: Angela Diveley Landry, Counsel, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP Related Links: https://blog.freshfields.us/post/102i1jq/ftc-seeks-to-revive-prohibitions-against-unfair-competition https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/P221202Section5PolicyStatement.pdf https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/P221202Section5PolicyWilsonDissentStmt.pdf Hosted by: Christina Ma, Partner, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen, & Katz and Jaclyn Phillips, Associate, White & Case LLP

In our second episode of Evercore Edge – a special double-feature of our new thought leadership podcast – Bill Anderson interviews BlackRock's Michelle Edkins, Teneo's Gaby Sulzberger, Wachtell Lipton's Sabastian Niles and Evercore's Zach Oleksiuk on how the landscape for U.S. public company boards has fundamentally changed, the trends that we expect to accelerate with new universal proxy card rules and how companies should prepare for what comes next. Guests: Michelle Edkins – a Managing Director at BlackRock, responsible for institutional relations, policy on stewardship issues, and communications related to BlackRock's investment stewardship perspectives and activities; Gaby Sulzberger – Chair of Teneo's Global ESG Advisory practice and a seasoned financial executive who's served on the Boards of many blue chip companies including Whole Foods, MasterCard, Eli Lilly, Warby Parker and others; Sabastian Niles – a Partner at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz specializing in shareholder and stakeholder activism, proxy fights, ESG and M&A; and Zach Oleksiuk – a Managing Director in Evercore's Strategic Shareholder Advisory practice specializing in shareholder engagement, corporate governance, ESG and IR © Evercore Inc. 2022. All rights reserved. The material contained herein is intended as a general market and/or economic commentary and is not intended to constitute financial, legal, tax, accounting or investment advice. The information contained in this podcast does not constitute an offer to buy or sell securities from any Evercore entity to the listener and should not be relied upon to evaluate any potential transaction. The information contained in this recording was obtained from publicly available sources, has not been independently verified by Evercore, may not be current, and Evercore has no obligation to provide any updates or changes. This podcast is not a product of Evercore Investment Research and the information contained in this podcast is not financial research. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are not necessarily those of Evercore and may differ from the views and opinions of other departments or divisions of Evercore and its affiliates. In addition, the receipt of this podcast by any listener is not to be taken to constitute such person a client of any Evercore entity. Neither Evercore nor any of its affiliates makes any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of the statements or any information contained in this podcast and any liability therefore (including in respect of direct, indirect or consequential loss or damage) is expressly disclaimed.

Welcome to the intersection of Sports and the Law. Dan Lust is joined this week by Mike Lawson to give you the latest in Sports Law. Robert Sarver has been suspended for one year and fined $10 million. (2:53) The law firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz started investigating last November the allegations of racism and misogyny within the Phoenix Suns organization. The report found that Sarver engaged in conduct that clearly violated common workplace standards, as reflected in team and League rules and policies. Sarver is prohibited from all basketball activities and operations for both the Suns and Mercury teams. MLB through a statement of Commissioner Manfred will voluntarily recognize MiLB as a union. (13:30) MiLB has begun the card process required by NLRB to form a union where they were assessing the interest of Minor League Players to unionize. With the MLB statement, the union will not need to go to a vote and can be recognized immediately. The language of such voluntary recognition is still to be drafted. MiLB has reported that they will allow the MLBPA to negotiate on their behalf. The next CBA to be negotiated will be the 2023 season. Scott Frost has been terminated as head coach of Nebraska. (18:45) Frost's buyout clause provides him with $15 million. Frost's clause was set to renew on October 1, 2022, which would have only given him $7.5 million for a buyout. Why couldn't Nebraska wait a few more weeks? Josh Gerben (@JoshGerben) joins to discuss Luka Dončić's trademark battle against his mother. (24:09) Luka's mother trademarked a dozen trademarks in Luka's name in Europe and the US. Luka filed for his own trademark, and it was denied because of his mother's trademarks. However, Luka's mother will not transfer the rights to Luka and his company. Luka has now filed for a petition of cancellation of his mother's trademarks. One of the claims in the cancellation petition is that his mother is not actually using the goods. Luka also revoked the consent he originally provided his mother to file the trademarks with his name in them. *** Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ConductDetrimental.com. Let us know if you want to join the team. Dan Wallach (@WallachLegal) | Dan Lust (@SportsLawLust) | Mike Lawson (@mike_sonof_law) Twitter | Instagram | TikTok | YouTube | Website | Email

Good morning everyone, this is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Tuesday, July 12th, 2022. Before I dive into the news… Club Membership Plug: Let’s stop and take a moment to talk about Fight Laugh Feast Club membership. By joining the Fight Laugh Feast Army, not only will you be aiding in our fight to take down secular & legacy media; but you’ll also get access to content placed in our Club Portal, such as past shows, all of our conference talks, and EXCLUSIVE content for club members that you won’t be able to find anywhere else. Lastly, you’ll also get discounts for our conferences… so if you’ve got $10 bucks a month to kick over our way, you can sign up now at flfnetwork.com Alright, now let’s dive into the news shall we? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/army-unvaccinated-guard-reserve-soldiers-pay-benefits-cut Army cuts off unvaccinated soldiers from service, threatening pay and benefits The Army has announced that the over 60,000 National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers that remain unvaccinated against COVID-19 can't participate in their military duties, effectively cutting them off from some of their benefits. "Soldiers who refuse the vaccination order without an approved or pending exemption request are subject to adverse administrative actions, including flags, bars to service, and official reprimands," an Army spokesperson said in a statement. "In the future, Soldiers who continue to refuse the vaccination order without an exemption may be subject to additional adverse administrative action, including separation." There are 40,000 National Guard and 22,000 Reserve soldiers who haven't received the vaccine, making up 13% and 12% of their ranks, respectively. There were 7,767 temporary exemptions given in the National Guard and 6,457 in the Reserves, according to Army data. Only six permanent medical exemptions have been made nationally for the National Guard, without any religious exemptions. Not a single Reserve soldier has received a medical or religious exemption. Over 3,200 have pending exemptions, and the new protocol will not apply to them. "We're going to give every soldier every opportunity to get vaccinated and continue their military career," Director of the Army Guard Lt. Gen. Jon Jensen said in a statement. "We're not giving up on anybody until the separation paperwork is signed and completed." Meanwhile, the Reserves have only reached 73.6% of its recruiting goal in the 2021 fiscal year. The National Guard reached 80.6% of its 2021 goal and, so far, 48.1% of its 2022 goal. However, unvaccinated soldiers are allowed to fulfill their state active-duty orders, which are normally given by governors during short-term emergencies. The Army has 652,005 fully vaccinated soldiers and 261,578 who are partially vaccinated. https://thepostmillennial.com/64-percent-of-democrats-do-not-want-biden-to-run-for-re-election-in-2024?utm_campaign=64487 Only 1 percent of voters ages 18-29 'strongly approve' of Joe Biden A majority of Democrats do not want Joe Biden to seek reelection in 2024 according to a New York Times/Siena College poll released Monday. In a closer breakdown of the numbers, only 1 percent of voters between 18-29 years of age "strongly approve" of Biden's performance. 18 percent of that demographic "somewhat approve." The poll reflects that 64 percent of Democratic voters want Biden out of the 2024 race as the president is "hemorrhaging support" from his party. Of the reasons cited, 33 percent of those polled said the president's age was the primary factor for why they didn't want him to run. President Joe Biden is currently 79 years old, which makes him the oldest serving president in history. The president will be 82 in the 2024 election cycle. The 849 registered voters who were polled put the president's approval rating at 33 percent. In January, a Quinnipiac University poll also had Biden's approval rating at 33 percent. Accumulative poll data had Biden's approval dropping below 40 percent in February and the president hasn't peaked above that number since the winter. The poll New York Times/Siena College was conducted between July 5 and 7 and also reflected other reasons for Biden's disapproval. 32 percent of those polled said the president's job performance was the problem while 12 percent just wanted somebody fresh. Notably, The New York Times ran an article over the weekend noting that Biden is, in fact, rather advanced in age. The poll also reflects a "country gripped by a pervasive sense of pessimism" as 75 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction. The last time that number was as low was during the 2008 financial crisis. The New York Time's reports that sense of national dread "spans every corner of the country, every age range and racial group, cities, suburbs and rural areas, as well as both political parties." The biggest number of those opposed to Biden's running in 2024 was with the young demographic. In numbers that also mirror a previous Quinnipiac poll, 94 percent of people under 30 want a different Democratic nominee. 41 percent of Hispanic voters "strongly disapprove" of the president's job, reflecting a Democratic concern that they are losing support from Hispanic Americans. 0 percent of those polled said that Covid was the most important concern in America. 37 percent of those polled said they intend to vote in the Democratic primary and 39 percent said they'll vote Republican. 20 percent of those polled said jobs and the economy were their biggest concern. 15 percent said cost of living and inflation. 5 percent said abortion. Of those who polled who identify as working class between the ages of 18 and 64, 94 percent said the economy was either in poor or fair condition. 26 percent of polled Democrats did say that Biden should be the nominee for president in 2024. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-power-rankings-gop-expected-take-control-house Fox News Power Rankings: GOP expected to take control of House Republicans are forecast to take control of the House this November with at least seven seats to spare, leaving Democrats in need of a dramatic turnaround to hold on to power. This edition of the Fox News Power Rankings also unveils the U.S. House model for the first time and sees gubernatorial candidate Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, carving out a slight edge in Pennsylvania. With redistricting completed and the bulk of the primaries behind us, the Power Rankings model now reveals a clear advantage for the GOP in the House. With 218 seats required to take control, the GOP is forecast to take 225 seats to the Democrats’ 180 seats. Those figures include only the races in which one party has an advantage. The actual size of a GOP majority will depend on how many highly competitive "toss up" races each party wins, but the Republicans are expected to gain at least a seven-seat majority (225 seats) and as much as a 37-seat majority (255 seats) in their "best case" scenario. The range of scenarios for the Democrats leaves the party with as much as a 38-seat deficit (180 seats), or just eight shy of a majority (210 seats). That is significant. In other words, even if Democrats win all 30 races currently marked as toss-ups, the party still does not have enough support to retain control of the House. Eagle-eyed Power Rankings readers would know that these ratings are just estimates, and that even races assigned to a party (particularly those in the "Lean" columns) are still very competitive. Nonetheless, the current forecast looks very cloudy for congressional Democrats. Question… do you enjoy shopping with integrity? Well then do I have a business for you! Boniface Woodworking LLC: Boniface Woodworking exists for those who enjoy shopping with integrity; who want to buy handmade wooden furniture, gifts, and heirloom items that will last for generations. From dining tables and church pulpits to cigar humidors and everything in between; quality pieces that you can give your children’s children, tie them to their roots, and transcend the basic function of whatever they are! So, start voting with your dollars, and stop buying cheap crap from people who hate you! Visit www.bonifacewoodworking.com to see our gallery, learn our story, and submit your order for heirloom quality wood items. Elon Musk is back in the news ladies and gentleman… https://thepostmillennial.com/elon-musk-uses-memes-to-signal-he-planned-to-take-twitter-to-court-all-along/?utm_campaign=64487 Elon Musk uses memes to signal he planned to take Twitter to court all along Elon Musk's Twitter buy is about to hit the court as the social media giant is suing him in order to force the sale the Space X CEO has reportedly backed away from. But Musk, who only backed away from the sale because he couldn't get an accurate count from Twitter as to how many of their users were bots, will likely now gain access to that data in court. Musk shared a meme to that effect on, where else, Twitter. "They said I couldn't buy Twitter," the first panel reads. "Then they wouldn't disclose bot into. Now they want to force me to buy Twitter in court. Now they have to disclose bot info in court." The text is accompanied by images of Elon laughing. The saga of the Musk Twitter buy has bene ongoing since April, with Musk bought a 9.2 percent stake in the company, becoming one of the company's top shareholders. He later went on to offer $44 billion for the enterprise, and the board of directors of Twitter approved that in June. Staff at Twitter, however, were less that pleased with the prospect of working for the outspoken entrepreneur. Musk addressed them directly prior to the board's approval of the sale. But Musk became concerned that perhaps he had overvalued the company and that a large percentage of Twitter users were bots. Twitter claims that bots are 5 percent of the total users, but Musk has been interested in seeing data to "make an independent assessment of the prevalence of fake or spam accounts on Twitter's platform." Musk began looking for this information in May, and then sought to terminate the deal in July. Twitter has said they would bring suit to force the sale. They hired firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. Musk appears to believe that this suit will bring the information he wanted all along, in the first place. This has been your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief… if you liked this show, hit that share button will you? If you want to sign up for a club membership, subscribe to our magazine, or register to our conference, you can do all of that at fightlaughfeast.com, and as always if you’d like to become a corporate partner of CrossPolitic, let’s talk. Email me, at garrison@fightlaughfeast.com. For CrossPolitic News, I’m Garrison Hardie. Have a great day, and Lord bless.

Happy Monday everyone, this is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Monday, July 11th, 2022. Before we get into what you may have missed over the weekend, this is just a reminder that our conference is just 4 months away! FLF Conference Plug: This year it’s happening in Knoxville TN, October 6-8! Don't miss beer & psalms, our amazing lineup of speakers which includes George Gilder, Jared Longshore, Pastor Wilson, Dr. Ben Merkle, Pastor Toby, and we can’t say yet…also dont miss our awesome vendors, meeting new friends, and stuff for the kids too…like jumpy castles and accidental infant baptisms! Also, did you know, you can save money, by signing up for a Club Membership. So, go to FightLaughFeast.com and sign up for a club membership and then register for the conference with that club discount. We can’t wait to fellowship, sing Psalms, and celebrate God’s goodness in Knoxville October 6-8. So, here’s what you may have missed over the weekend: https://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/twitter-lawyers-sue-elon-musk-broken-deal-report Twitter lawyers up to sue Elon Musk over broken buyout deal: Twitter has retained the services of a heavyweight merger law firm to sue Tesla CEO Elon Musk for moving to drop his $44 billion takeover of the company, according to a report. The company has hired Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz LLP to represent it in a forthcoming suit, Bloomberg reported Sunday. Bloomberg cited sources who declined to be identified due to the private nature of the matter. A law firm representing the Tesla CEO sent a letter to Twitter on Friday, alleging that it appears "to have made false and misleading representations" when Musk agreed to buy the company on April 25 and has "breached" multiple provisions of the initial agreement. Musk's team has raised concerns with "spam bots" on the platform, and the Tesla CEO has threatened to walk away from the deal if the company fails to show that less than 5% of its daily active users are automated spam accounts. Musk has argued that Twitter significantly underestimated the number of these "spam bots" on its service. Last month, Twitter offered Musk access to its "firehose" of raw data on hundreds of millions of daily tweets, according to multiple reports at the time, though neither the company nor Musk confirmed this. Twitter said it removes 1 million spam accounts each day in a call with executives Thursday during a briefing that aimed to shed more light on the company's fake and bot accounts. Twitter said on the call that the spam accounts represent well below 5% of its active user base each quarter. Private data, which isn't available publicly and thus not in the data "firehose" that was given to Musk, includes IP addresses, phone numbers and location. Twitter said such private data helps avoid misidentifying real accounts as spam. Neither SpaceX nor Tesla nor Twitter immediately responded to FOX Business' request for comment Sunday. A receptionist for Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz declined to confirm or deny the report. More from our booming economy: https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/us-postal-service-rate-increases-takes-effect-sunday US Postal Service rate increases takes effect Sunday The next time you mail through the United States Postal Service (USPS), it's going to cost you extra. The USPS' rate hike, upping First-Class Mail prices by 6.5%, took effect Sunday, according to the agency. When the USPS made its announcement in April it noted that the 6.5% increase would still be below inflation, which is sitting at a rate of 8.6%. However, this likely won't be the last increase from the USPS. In May, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy said Americans should get used to "uncomfortable" postage rate increases in coming years as the U.S. Postal Service seeks to become self-sufficient. The Postal Service Board of Governors sets postage rates, but DeJoy said he’ll advocate for raising prices until "we have accomplished our objective of projecting a trajectory that shows us being self-sustaining." That objective is laid out in the USPS' 10-year plan, Delivering for America. As part of this plan, the USPS is working to break even by the fiscal year 2023 and avoid $160 billion in projected losses over the next 10 years. The price adjustments taking effect Sunday "will help with the implementation of the Delivering for America plan, including a $40 billion investment in core Postal Service infrastructure over the next ten years," according to the USPS. https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2022/07/11/world-economic-forum-says-democracy-is-dying-ditch-fossil-fuels-and-save-it/ World Economic Forum: Gas Prices Must Go Even Higher — to Save Democracy The World Economic Forum (WEF) released a position paper Monday that inexorably links two claimed global crises as one – “climate change” and the “decline of democracy.” The WEF paper argues for the past 15 years, democracy has been in decline worldwide. To protect and promote freedom, “leading democracies must strengthen their economies and safeguard liberty.” It goes on to say ignoring progress toward a “low-carbon economy could put democracies in greater economic peril, not less” while repeating the broader demand of environmental activists for companies to stop investing fossil fuels. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought renewed focus on this economic weakness, the WEF says. What is the answer for the U.S. and Europe? Pricing the alternatives to green energy out of the market. It says: First, leading democracies should agree to end the underpricing of fossil fuels, which is the principal factor preventing a clean energy transition. The underpricing associated with producing and burning coal, oil and gas amounted to $5.9 trillion in economic costs in 2020. Nearly a quarter of these losses – $1.45 trillion – occurred in 48 major and smaller democracies. The leading democracies of the G20 should collectively commit to phasing out cost and tax breaks for the production and consumption of fossil fuels. They should also phase in more efficient pricing of fossil fuels through taxes or tradable permits to cover the costs of local air pollution, global warming, and other economic damages. The paper goes on to argue that compliance can and must be enforced. Taxes can be imposed on carbon-intensive imports to reduce the risk of unfair competition for their domestic industries “and to deter companies from relocating overseas to avoid compliance at home.” Doesn’t that just scream democracy? Forcing other economies to reform their under-pricing of fossil fuels to avoid the penalties imposed by the policy should also be actively pursued, according to the WEF, with U.S. President Joe Biden already committed to punishing the fossil fuel industry out of existence. The paper concludes that by delaying a clean energy transition, “leading democracies are making their economies more vulnerable through continued reliance on fossil fuels.” Collectively acting to foster a green transition “is not only good for the climate but also critical for protecting democracy,” ……… that’s the conclusion of the paper… Gold River Trading Co. Are you tired of buying sugary drinks and coffee from large woke corporations? Throw a tea party! Gold River Trading Co. is an American company that offers premium alternatives for Americans who enjoy a delicious cup of tea. Start your day with Gold River’s invigorating American Breakfast Blend, cool down with a pitcher of crisp & refreshing Iced Tea, or unwind with Chamomile Herbal tea. Explore a variety of high-quality blends and enjoy a healthy, flavorful alternative from an American company that shares your values. Go to goldriverco.com and save 10% off all orders using discount code CROSSPOLITIC at checkout. Now, it’s time for the topic that I love, trade regulations! No… not really, sports! https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2022/07/08/report-nfl-teams-to-start-training-camp-with-no-covid-protocols/ NFL Teams to Start Training Camp with No Covid Protocols For the first time since the pandemic began, NFL teams will start training camp without any Covid protocols or restrictions, according to a report in the Washington Post. That means the league will not mandate that players wear masks, participate in contact tracing, wear bracelets, or otherwise partake in any of the standard Covid protocols the league has had in place since 2020. The NFL did, however, leave open the possibility of reinstating Covid protocols should the need arise. “Should there be a reason to reimpose aspects of the protocols or to take other measures, we will work closely with clubs, the NFLPA and our respective experts, and local, state and federal public health officials to continue to safeguard the health of the NFL community,” the memo to all teams stated. While the league will not place players or coaches under any restrictions, all employees of the 32 league franchises are expected to conform to whatever coronavirus safeguards local authorities have put in place. The NFL and NFLPA agreed to end the league’s coronavirus testing regimen in March. And finally, Novak Djokovic, won at Wimbledon for the seventh time: Djokovic beats Kyrgios to win 4th consecutive Wimbledon title

Twitter is mounting legal action against Elon Musk as he tries to terminate the deal to buy the social media company, black Americans' higher exposure to cryptocurrencies has left them more vulnerable to the financial downturn, Cairo's storied houseboats have been removed as part of bigger changes that many fear will destroy heritage and green space in the Egyptian capital.Mentioned in this podcast:Experts say Musk faces uphill battle for victory in Twitter legal fightTwitter hires Wachtell legal firm to sue Elon Musk for ending $44bn acquisitionCrypto collapse reverberates widely among black American investorsCairo houseboats adrift in storm over developmentThe FT News Briefing is produced by Fiona Symon, Sonja Hutson and Marc Filippino. The show's editor is Jess Smith. Additional help by Peter Barber, Michael Lello, David da Silva and Gavin Kallmann. The show's theme song is by Metaphor Music. Topher Forhecz is the FT's executive producer. The FT's global head of audio is Cheryl Brumley.Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.