I think your high level and politically diverse readership would be a great forum to start a much needed conversation about the bi-partisan failure in increasing the politicization of the courts which results in attacks on highly qualified nominees of both parties. While I am not optimistic that we can change much in this highly polarized time, I still believe it is important for well meaning lawyers across the political spectrum to say we have had enough. Our courts are too important to permit the increasing attacks coming from both sides.
David, thanks for asking. I think more coverage of how the pandemic has changed legal practice would be super interesting. Not only who is going back to the physical office, but also how the pandemic changed perceptions of legal work or the legal field. And there are lots of spinoffs, like its possible impact on law school applications (way up this past year, it turns out).
My nostalgia for the old days of ATL makes me want to post "Firsties!" But instead, I will just say that I think Original Jurisdiction looks wonderful, and thank you for creating it.
To Orin's point about law school applications - my sister, a 36 year old mother of four, had been working towards getting her law school applications in pre-Covid. She ended up taking the GRE a bit late and missing the deadline for a September 2020 start. Now, one of the schools that had told her she was a lock for a merit scholarship going into the 2021 application year has been so flooded with applications that they had to waitlist her. And former students of my HS IP elective class are reporting the same with respect to their law school applications.
I am eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court decision in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, the appeal from the Ninth Circuit addressing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. While it's almost certain that the Ninth Circuit decision will be vacated or reversed, the Court will be setting the standard for future challenges to the restrictive laws that states are now adopting. I wonder whether some in the Senate are waiting to see what the Court does. I expect (or maybe just hope) that Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Kagan are together in the majority.
laterals- law firms have become much better at determining the actual value of books of business. This lets them “price “ better. Also, at least from what I am seeing, firms are looking for laterals who will provide access to additional work from existing clients outside the work they typically get. So in sum I think the laterals are proving to be better “finds” and the firms that have clear expectations and business objectives will continue to recruit laterals at a swift pace.
DEI is not a passing fad. DEI professionals have always told firms there is a business objective to maintaining and growing a diverse workforce. As with most things in law it all took longer than some partners and clients had the patience for. However, the firms cultures are shifting in ways that are beginning to increase equity and inclusion. And this goes way beyond diversity officers and flashy reports. Firms are starting to see real, sustainable and profitable work being generated by a more diverse group of lawyers. As with most real change it is a pocketbook issue. Investment in DEI is paying dividends in revenues and new or enhanced client relations. And man do we still have a long way to go.
Mergers- many firms are sitting on top of large war chests. And many have undergone significant strategic changes in terms of leadership and direction and focus of the firm. So yes there maybe mergers but I don’t think it will be tie ups of weak firms trying to fend off the reaper. Rather we may see much more strategic and thoughtful mergers. And really maybe more practice bolt ons as well. These are less risky propositions than taking on the potential liability an merger may present. And a question for you, why don’t firms treat practices more like business units and, like our clients, sell them or turn them into freestanding firms. Seems
Like a Kirkland would get a pretty good price if it sold its CapM practice to a UK firm for example that is trying to get into the US.
David, I'm seeing new strategies for associate retention that go beyond bonuses and are more about the experiences that associates want from their legal career. One example that I think we'll see more of is giving associates the chance to experiment with emerging tech tools to make their job less tedious, and give them a window into the future of the profession. We're doing a number of Clearbrief pilot projects led by young associates, which gives them the chance to be innovative and impact the way things are done at the firm - a feeling that money can't buy.
I think your high level and politically diverse readership would be a great forum to start a much needed conversation about the bi-partisan failure in increasing the politicization of the courts which results in attacks on highly qualified nominees of both parties. While I am not optimistic that we can change much in this highly polarized time, I still believe it is important for well meaning lawyers across the political spectrum to say we have had enough. Our courts are too important to permit the increasing attacks coming from both sides.
David, thanks for asking. I think more coverage of how the pandemic has changed legal practice would be super interesting. Not only who is going back to the physical office, but also how the pandemic changed perceptions of legal work or the legal field. And there are lots of spinoffs, like its possible impact on law school applications (way up this past year, it turns out).
My nostalgia for the old days of ATL makes me want to post "Firsties!" But instead, I will just say that I think Original Jurisdiction looks wonderful, and thank you for creating it.
To Orin's point about law school applications - my sister, a 36 year old mother of four, had been working towards getting her law school applications in pre-Covid. She ended up taking the GRE a bit late and missing the deadline for a September 2020 start. Now, one of the schools that had told her she was a lock for a merit scholarship going into the 2021 application year has been so flooded with applications that they had to waitlist her. And former students of my HS IP elective class are reporting the same with respect to their law school applications.
I am eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court decision in Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, the appeal from the Ninth Circuit addressing Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. While it's almost certain that the Ninth Circuit decision will be vacated or reversed, the Court will be setting the standard for future challenges to the restrictive laws that states are now adopting. I wonder whether some in the Senate are waiting to see what the Court does. I expect (or maybe just hope) that Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Kagan are together in the majority.
As to your predictions here are a few thoughts,
laterals- law firms have become much better at determining the actual value of books of business. This lets them “price “ better. Also, at least from what I am seeing, firms are looking for laterals who will provide access to additional work from existing clients outside the work they typically get. So in sum I think the laterals are proving to be better “finds” and the firms that have clear expectations and business objectives will continue to recruit laterals at a swift pace.
DEI is not a passing fad. DEI professionals have always told firms there is a business objective to maintaining and growing a diverse workforce. As with most things in law it all took longer than some partners and clients had the patience for. However, the firms cultures are shifting in ways that are beginning to increase equity and inclusion. And this goes way beyond diversity officers and flashy reports. Firms are starting to see real, sustainable and profitable work being generated by a more diverse group of lawyers. As with most real change it is a pocketbook issue. Investment in DEI is paying dividends in revenues and new or enhanced client relations. And man do we still have a long way to go.
Mergers- many firms are sitting on top of large war chests. And many have undergone significant strategic changes in terms of leadership and direction and focus of the firm. So yes there maybe mergers but I don’t think it will be tie ups of weak firms trying to fend off the reaper. Rather we may see much more strategic and thoughtful mergers. And really maybe more practice bolt ons as well. These are less risky propositions than taking on the potential liability an merger may present. And a question for you, why don’t firms treat practices more like business units and, like our clients, sell them or turn them into freestanding firms. Seems
Like a Kirkland would get a pretty good price if it sold its CapM practice to a UK firm for example that is trying to get into the US.
David, I'm seeing new strategies for associate retention that go beyond bonuses and are more about the experiences that associates want from their legal career. One example that I think we'll see more of is giving associates the chance to experiment with emerging tech tools to make their job less tedious, and give them a window into the future of the profession. We're doing a number of Clearbrief pilot projects led by young associates, which gives them the chance to be innovative and impact the way things are done at the firm - a feeling that money can't buy.
What is the career path of the former DOJ junior attorney that became the center of the Trump maelstrom?
Is Cedar Point the only 6-3 case with the conservative 6 joining the majority opinion and the liberal 3 joining the dissent?