Who Is Suing Elon Musk Today? Cards Against Humanity, COME ON DOWN! – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Apu
Gomes/Getty
Images)


Black
Card:

We
have
terrible
news.
Seven
years
ago,
150,000
people
paid
us
$15
to
protect
a
pristine
parcel
of
land
on
the
US-Mexico
border
from
racist
billionaire
Donald
Trump’s
very
stupid
wall.
Unfortunately,
an
even
richer,
more
racist
billionaire,
…………
snuck
up
on
us
from
behind
and
completely
fucked
that
land
with
gravel,
tractors,
and
space
garbage.”


White
Card:


Elon
Musk,
via
SpaceX,
the
rocket
company
he
uses
to
subsidize
his
stupid
plan
to
colonize
Mars
for
the
Übermenschen
.

In
2017,
the
guys
behind
the
wildly
successful
party
game
Cards
Against
Humanity
(CAH)

crowdsourced

$15
each
from
roughly
150,000
people
to
“purchase
a
plot
of
vacant
land
on
the
US/Mexico
border
and
retain
a
law
firm
specializing
in
eminent
domain
to
make
it
as
time-consuming
and
expensive
as
possible
for
Trump
to
build
his
preposterous
wall.”

Screenshot 2024-09-23 at 1.33.21 PM

“Unfortunately,
the
United
States
government
is
more
powerful
than
a
comedy
card
game,”
they
conceded.
“However,
we’ll
do
everything
we
can
to
protest
the
wall
and
slow
down
the
process
of
eminent
domain.
If
Trump
tries
to
build
a
wall
on
our
land,
we’ll
be
a
big
pain
in
the
ass.”

And
indeed,
Trump

was

a
“big
pain
in
the
ass,”
and
continues
to
be
so.
But
with
respect
to
the
CAH
plot
in
Texas,
Elon
Musk
turned
out
to
be
an
even
bigger
pain.
According
to
a

complaint

filed
in
the
District
Court
of
Cameron
County,
SpaceX,
which
has
a
launch
site
just
three
miles
away,
cleared
the
land
of
vegetation,
laid
down
hard
gravel,
and
has
been
using
it
as
a
construction
site
for
six
months.

Screenshot 2024-09-23 at 1.35.51 PM

“After
we
caught
him,
SpaceX
gave
us
a
12-hour
ultimatum
to
accept
a
lowball
offer
for
less
than
half
our
land’s
value,”
CAH

wrote

on
a
website
announcing
the
suit.
“We
said,
‘Go
fuck
yourself,
Elon
Musk.
We’ll
see
you
in
court.’”

The
complaint
alleges
trespass,
nuisance,
unjust
enrichment,
and
tortious
interference
with
existing
and
prospective
contracts
and
business
relationships.
That
last
is
a
pretty
good
troll,
since
it’s
exactly
what
Twitter
alleged
in
the

SLAPP
suit

against
Media
Matters
for
America
for
publishing
screenshots
of
Nazi
content
next
to
ads
for
companies
like
IBM,
Disney+,
and
Oracle.
Twitter
dragged
Media
Matters,
which
operates
in
DC,
into
federal
court
in
Texas
demanding
to
be
made
whole
for
the
ensuing
advertiser
exodus,
and
it
ensured
that
it
got
the
case
in
front
of
Judge
Reed
O’Connor,
one
of
the
only
judges
in
the
country
craven
enough
to

deny

a
motion
to
dismiss
for
lack
of
personal
jurisdiction.

Here,
CAH
claims
reputational
damage
with
the
donors
who
subsidized
the
purchase
of
the
land
and
demands
at
least
$15
million.

“Musk,
by
allowing
his
company
to
wrongfully
operate
on
CAH’s
Property,
casts
the
shadow
of
possible
association
between
him
and
CAH,”
they
argue
in
the
complaint.
“Nothing
could
be
more
offensive
to
CAH
nor
more
harmful
to
its
reputation
with
its
supporters.”

In
addition
to
suing,
CAH
set
up
ElonOwesYou100Dollars.com,
to
publicize
the
effort.

If
we
win,
we’ll
equally
split
the
lawsuit’s
net
proceeds
among
all
150,000
of
our
original
subscribers,
up
to
$100
each.
While
this
isn’t
enough
to
compensate
our
subscribers
for
the
anguish
they’ve
suffered
witnessing
Elon
Musk
defile
their
once-verdant
land⸺where
wild
horses
galloped
freely
in
the
Texas
moonlight
⸺we
think
it’s
a
pretty
good
start.

“P.S.
We
will
also
accept
Twitter.com
as
compensation,”
they
add.

It’s
an
excellent
troll,
and
one
which
is
guaranteed
to
drive
the
internet’s
most
brain-poisoned
oligarch
to
lose
his
shit.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

For My Republican Friends – Above the Law

(Photo
by
Michael
M.
Santiago/Getty
Images)

Early
presidential
voting
is
kicking
off.

It’s
time
for
me
to
stop
foaming
at
the
mouth
and
start
trying
to
influence
things.

For
my
friends
who
have
been
Republicans
for
decades

who
voted
for
Reagan
and
McCain
and
Romney
over
the
years

please
read
on.

Here’s President
Reagan

on
NATO:
“If
our
fellow
democracies
are
not
secure,
we
cannot
be
secure.
If
you
are
threatened,
we
are
threatened.
And
if
you
are
not
at
peace,
we
cannot
be
at
peace.”

Here’s Donald
Trump

on
NATO: “Someone
said,
‘Sir!
Would
you
leave
us
if
we
don’t
pay
our
bills?’
They
hated
my
answer.
I
said,
‘Yeah,
I
would
consider
it.’”

Trump’s
former
National
Security
Advisor, John
Bolton
,
made
it
even
more
explicit:
If
Trump
wins
in
November,
“the
U.S.
will
be
out
of
NATO.”

Here’s President
Reagan
 on
free
trade:

America’s
most
recent
experiment
with
protectionism
was
a
disaster
for
the
working
men
and
women
of
this
country.
When
Congress
passed
the
Smoot-Hawley
tariff
in
1930,
we
were
told
that
it
would
protect
America
from
foreign
competition
and
save
jobs
in
this
country

the
same
line
we
hear
today.
The
actual
result
was
the
Great
Depression,
the
worst
economic
catastrophe
in
our
history;
one
out
of
four
Americans
were
thrown
out
of
work.

Here’s Donald
Trump
 on
the
same
subject:

We
are
going
to
have
10%
to
20%
tariffs
on
foreign
countries
that
have
been
ripping
us
off
for
years,
we
are
gonna
charge
them
10%
to
20%
to
come
in
and
take
advantage
of
our
country
because
that
is
what
they
have
been
doing.


President
Reagan
 famously
said
that
the
Eleventh
Commandment
was:
“Thou
shalt
not
speak
ill
of
any
fellow
Republican.”


Donald
Trump
 called
Dick
Cheney,
for
whom
you
voted,
“an
irrelevant
RINO.”


Donald
Trump

had
this
to
say
about
John
McCain,
for
whom
you
voted:
“He’s
not
a
war
hero.
He
was
a
war
hero
because
he
was
captured.
I
like
people
who
weren’t
captured.”


Donald
Trump
 called
Mitt
Romney,
for
whom
you
voted,
a
“pompous
ass”

and
that
was before Romney
voted
to
impeach
him.


Donald
Trump

called
Paul
Ryan,
for
whom
you
voted,
“a
loser
who
left
Congress
in
disgrace.”
I
don’t
remember
whether
that
was
before
or
after
Trump
called
Ryan
“weak”
and
“stupid.”

And
Donald
Trump,
of
course,
stood
silent
for
three
hours
while
a
mob
attacked
the
Capitol
Building
on
January
6,
2021. 
Trump
neither
asked
the
mob
to
stop
nor
asked
the
National
Guard
to
protect
the
legislative
branch.

Can
you
imagine
Reagan,
or
Cheney,
or
McCain,
or
Romney,
or
Ryan
doing
the
same?

I
know
that
you’re
a
Republican.
I
know
that
you
think
Democrats
are
the
enemy.

But
please
think
hard
about
Trump
before
you
vote.



 



Mark 
Herrmann spent
17
years
as
a
partner
at
a
leading
international
law
firm
and
is
now
deputy
general
counsel
at
a
large
international
company.
He
is
the
author
of




The
Curmudgeon’s
Guide
to
Practicing
Law
 and Drug
and
Device
Product
Liability
Litigation
Strateg
y (affiliate
links).
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at 
[email protected].

Is The YSL RICO Trial A Court Proceeding Or A Reality Show? – Above the Law

Are
you
seeing
this?

There
are
three
constants
in
life:
death,
taxes,
and
YSL
RICO
fuckery.
The
shenanigans
died
down
after
the
defense
shifted
from
questioning
Lil
Woody,
but
things
are
turning

back
up
to
11

with
Quindarrius
“Lil
Dee”
Zachary

QZ
for
short

on
the
stand.
His
short
time
on
the
stand
feels
less
like
the
stuff
you’d
expect
of
a
serious
racketeering
trial
and
more
like
a
medley
of
realty
TV
show
greatest
hits.
For
example,
there
are
moments
that
channel
Flavor
of
Love:

Judges
have
done
far
worse
than
giggle
at
a
smitten
man
on
the
witness
stand,
but
pull
it
together,
Judge
Whitaker!
You’re
overseeing
a
serious
trial,
not
a
school
dance
where
the
“will
they,
won’t
they”
students
hold
hands
for
the
first
time.

There
were
moments
that
channel
Sober
House:

I
don’t
even
know
what
show
this
would
be,
but
it
is
great
television
nonetheless:

Between
this
case
and
the
upcoming
Diddy
trial,
you
should
cancel
all
of
your
subscriptions
to
those
streaming
sites.
These
are
going
to
be
the
only
things
worth
watching.


Earlier
:

Woody
Is
Back
In
The
Hot
Seat
&
Credibility
Is
Rapidly
Burning


YSL
RICO
Prosecutors
So
Bad
Judge
Mandates
Tutorial
On
How
To
Do
Their
Jobs



Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s
.
 He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor
,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.

Top Biglaw Firm Announces Merger With Top Midsize Firm – Above the Law

With
Q4
nearly
upon
us,
Biglaw
firms
most
definitely
have
the
urge
to
merge.
Within
the
last
month,
three
major
mergers
have
already
been
announced


Troutman
Pepper
and
Locke
Lord
,
followed
by Ballard
Spahr
and
Lane
Powell
,
then
by

Womble
Bond
Dickinson
and
Lewis
Roca

Law
firm
merger
interest
is
at
an

“all-time
high,”

and
it’s
no
surprise
that
two
more
firms
have
signaled
that
they’ll
soon
be
combining.

Today,
Am
Law
100
firm
Taft
Stettinius
&
Hollister
and
Mid-Market
50
firm
Sherman
&
Howard
announced
that
they’d
combine
to
create
a
1,050-lawyer
firm,
with
a
total
of
more
than
$810
million
in
gross
revenue
based
on
last
year’s
numbers.
The
merger
will
take
effect
on
January
1,
2025,
and
the
new
firm
may
see
itself
rise
up
to
20
spots
in
the
Am
Law
100.

Taft
has
been
doing
quite
well
in
recent
years,
growing
its
revenue
by
more
than
400%
since
2017.
With
growth
still
in
mind,
the
firm
may
not
be
done
when
it
comes
to
mergers.
The

American
Lawyer

has
the
scoop:

In
an
interview,
Bob
Hicks,
the
managing
partner
and
chairman
of
the
executive
committee
of
Taft,
said
that
the
firm
is
also
in
preliminary
talks
with
two
or
three
other
firms
for
a
potential
combination,
although
he
noted,
“I
normally
talk
to
20
or
30
firms
before
I
find
one
that’s
viable.”

Hicks
said
that
[Taft
and
Sherman
&
Howard]
have
already
begun
integrating
their
people
and
systems,
anticipating
the
combination,
and
their
operations,
websites,
and
internal
systems
will
be
ready
to
launch
together
on
January
1.
However,
their
partner
compensation
systems
may
take
around
one
to
three
years
to
fully
integrate
because
each
separate
firm
will
be
deciding
partner
rates
for
now,
according
to
Hicks.

Congratulations
to
Taft
and
Sherman
&
Howard
on
what
promises
to
be
a
successful
alliance.


In
the
Latest
Big
Merger,
Taft
to
Combine
with
Sherman
&
Howard

[American
Lawyer]



Staci ZaretskyStaci
Zaretsky
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter

and

Threads

or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn
.

Biglaw Firm Facing Public Corruption Investigation – Above the Law

Mega
international
firm
Dentons
is
facing
a
public
corruption
investigation
in
South
Africa.
Officials
there
are
looking
into
the
massive
fraud
under
former
President
Jacob
Zuma
and
his
associates,
the
Gupta
brothers.
The
Guptas
are
wanted
for
a
practice
of
“state
capture,”
using
their
network
of
family
businesses
to
get
public
contracts
through
their
relationship
with
Zuma.

South
Africa’s
Judicial
Inquiry
into
the
corruption,
the

Zondo
Report
,
notes
payments
made
to
Gupta-controlled
companies
in
connection
with
the
firm’s
work
on
behalf
of
state
energy
company
Eskom.
As

reported
by

RollOnFriday:

Explaining
how
the
payments
came
to
be
made,
Dentons
Africa
CEO
Noor
Kapdi
testified
that
Rafique
Bagus,
a
client,
agreed
to
‘advertise’
Dentons
to
the
public
sector
(a
claim
Bagus
disputes).

The
alleged
arrangement
blossomed
when
Dentons
was
appointed
by
Eskom
to
undertake
a
forensic
investigation
into
allegations
of
internal
corruption
in
2015.

Kapdi
testified
that
when
he
contacted
Bagus
to
thank
him
and
organise
remuneration,
Bagus
told
the
partner
he
didn’t
need
to
be
rewarded

but
that
a
third
party
would
be
in
touch.

Kapdi
was
subsequently
contacted
by
Gupta
henchman
Ashok
Narayan,
who
directed
him
to
pay
Fortime
Consultants.
Unfortunately
for
Dentons,
Fortime
was
the
“laundering
vehicle
used
by
the
Gupta
Enterprise
to
receive
kickbacks
on
public
contracts”,
said
the
Zonda
Report.

Eskom
paid
Dentons
R20m
(roughly
£900k)
for
its
work,
and
the
law
firm
paid
Fortime
R1.2m
(£50k).

A
similar
paper
trail
was
left
when
Dentons
did
work
on
behalf
of
state-owned
defense
contractor
Denel.

The
Zondo
Report
notes
this
payment
scheme
“points
to
irregularity.”
It
continues,
“In
both
cases,
the
‘marketing
fees’
paid
by
Dentons
to
Fortime
were
only
negotiated
after
the
relevant
contracts
had
been
awarded.”
To
boot,
the
firm
was
“unable
to
produce
any
marketing
material
or
reports
that
Mr
Narayan
or
Fortime
had
ever
produced
for
Dentons.”
Which
led
the
Report
to
the
following
conclusion,
“it
appears
that
the
‘marketing’
work
performed
by
Mr
Narayan
could
only
have
been
influence
peddling.”
And
it
described
the
money
flow
from
Dentons
as,
“expenditure
tainted
by
State
Capture.”

A
spokesperson
for
Dentons
said
the
firm
was
cooperating
with
the
investigation,
“Dentons
South
Africa
has
cooperated
fully
with
all
government
inquiries
into
its
legal
work
for
Eskom
in
2015,
and
will
continue
to
do
so
on
a
going
forward
basis.”

Dentons
isn’t
the
first
Biglaw
firm
caught
in
this
investigation.

In
2017,

Hogan
Lovells
“found
its
name
connected
to
State
Capture
as
a
result
of
work
that
former
partners
performed…
on
an
employment
matter”
and
expressed
“regret
that
our
work
was
associated
with
State
Capture.”




Kathryn Rubino HeadshotKathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of

The
Jabot
podcast
,
and
co-host
of

Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer
.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email

her

with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter

@Kathryn1
 or
Mastodon

@[email protected].

Documentary Shows How Musician Clawed Back Rights To Number 1 Hit After Decades Of Being Paid Nothing – Above the Law

The
recording
industry
has
a
bad
reputation.
It’s
mostly
deserved.

Richie
Weeks
recorded
the
top
dance
hit
on
the
charts
with
“Rock
Your
World.”
But
then
he
became
the
victim
of
recording
industry
shenanigans
as
his
label
went
under
and
the
rights
to
his
music
got
passed
around
without
anyone
paying
him
anything
owed
under
his
contract.


Taking
Back
The
Grove

details
how
longtime
fan
Jerome
Derradji,
who
runs
his
own
label,
crossed
paths
with
Weeks
and
determined
to
get
the
artist
the
money
he
deserved.
What
follows
is
a
journey
involving
racial
injustice,
an
executive’s
“reply
all”
mistake,
and
a
key
provision
of
the
1976
Copyright
Act.

Raekwon
of
the
Wu-Tang
Clan,
one
of
the
executive
producers
of
the
film,
said:

“Growing
up
in
NY,
I
was
around
some
of
the
best
disco
music

I
loved
it.
It
inspired
me.
Richie,
and
many
artists
like
him,
helped
influence
the
culture.
What
happened
to
Richie
is
an
example
of
something
that
happens
all
of
the
time
in
the
music
industry.
I’m
really
glad
I
can
be
a
part
of
bringing
his
story
to
the
world.”

Directed
by
Celia
Aniskovich,
the
32-minute
film
offers
a
bleak
view
of
the
music
industry,
but
offers
a
ray
of
hope
for
artists
who
know
their
rights
under
the
Copyright
Act.

Penalties For Violating Biglaw Office Attendance Mandates May Soon Have More Bite – Above the Law

Covid
cases
may
be
picking
up
again,
but
the
height
of
the
pandemic
is
now
behind
us,
and
the
powers
that
be
at
Biglaw
firms
across
the
country
want
their
workforce
to
return
to
the
office.
At
some
firms,
associates
and
partners
alike
have
been
somewhat
laissez
faire
about
hybrid
work
policies,
but
now,
Biglaw
firms
are
entering
“put
up
or
shut
up
mode,”
and
they’ll
be
pushing
their
return-to-office
mandates

hard.
And
what
will
that
mean?

Want
that
bonus?
Get
to
the
office.
Want
your
partner
draw?
Get
to
the
office.
Some
firms,
of
course,
already
have
these
policies
in
place,
but
now
they’re

really

going
to
be
enforced.

The

American
Lawyer

has
some
additional
details
on
Biglaw
firms’
rush
to
get
lawyers
back
to
their
real
estate
holdings:

[Jeff]
Lowe[,]
[senior
managing
partner
and
market
president
for
Washington,
D.C.,
at
CenterPeak],
said
he’s
spoken
with
a
number
of
firm
chairs
who’ve
said
“this
is
gonna
be
the
year
where
we
really
put
up
or
shut
up.”
That
could
mean
withholding
a
portion
or
percentage
of
a
partner’s
draw
or
reducing
bonus
pool
eligibility,
he
said.

“I
think
they’ve
already
told
their
people,
‘If
you
don’t
show
up,
there’s
going
to
be
a
penalty.’
And
now
is
the
time
where
they’re
gonna
have
to
actually
enforce
that
penalty,”
he
said.
“It’ll
be
interesting
to
see
what
happens,
because
they
know
they
always
run
the
risk
of
a
partner
with
an
essential
practice
saying,
‘To
heck
with
you,
I’m
outta
here.’
That
can
be
a
lot
of
money
walking
out
the
door
because
the
person
wasn’t
coming
downtown
as
many
days
as
they’d
like.”

These
days,
most
Biglaw
firms
require
three
days
in
the
office,
but
a
little
more
than
a
handful
of
firms
want
their
attorneys
to
work
from
the
office
at
least
four
days
each
week
(Davis
Polk
;

Latham
;

Ropes
&
Gray
;

Simpson
Thacher
;

Skadden
;

Vinson
&
Elkins
;
and

Weil
).
Come
2025,
or
perhaps
even
sooner,
leaders
at
many
Biglaw
firms
may
flex
their
power
to
demand
more
office
attendance,
joining
the
firms
that
already
require
more
facetime.
As
noted
by
Lauren
Drake,
a
partner
at
the
legal
recruiting
firm
Macrae,
“Some
firms
are
getting
considerably
more
aggressive
getting
people
back
to
the
office,
saying
there
could
be
an
impact
on
performance
reviews
and
bonuses,
things
like
that.”

As
soon
as
you
find
out
about
office
attendance
plans
at
your
firm,
please email
us

(subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Office
Attendance”)
or
text
us
at
(646)
820-8477.
We
always
keep
our
sources
on
stories
anonymous.
There’s
no
need
to
send
a
memo
(if
one
exists)
using
your
firm
email
account;
your
personal
email
account
is
fine.
If
a
memo
has
been
circulated,
please
be
sure
to
include
it
as
proof;
we
like
to
post
complete
memos
as
a
service
to
our
readers.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
attach
as
a
picture
if
you
are
worried
about
metadata
in
a
PDF
or
Word
file.
Thanks.


‘Put
Up
or
Shut
Up’
in
Office
Attendance:
Law
Firm
Leaders
Still
Hold
the
Cards

[American
Lawyer]



Staci ZaretskyStaci
Zaretsky
 is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to

email

her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on

X/Twitter

and

Threads

or
connect
with
her
on

LinkedIn
.

195 Congress Members Call for Extension of Enhanced Premium Tax Credits – MedCity News

In
a
pair
of
letters,
195
members
of
Congress
recently
urged
leadership
to
extend
the
enhanced
premium
tax
credits
that
will
expire
in
2025.
The
enhanced
premium
tax
credits

which
were
introduced
in
2021

lowered
health
insurance
premium
costs
for
millions
of
people
purchasing
coverage
on
the
marketplace.


One
of
the
letters

was
signed
by
41
Senators
and
was
addressed
to
Majority
Leader
Chuck
Schumer
(D-New
York)
and
Minority
Leader
Mitch
McConnell
(R-Kentucky).
The

other

was
signed
by
154
U.S.
representatives
and
was
sent
to
Schumer,
McConnell,
House
Speaker
Mike
Johnson
(R-Louisiana)
and
House
Leader
Hakeem
Jeffries
(D-New
York).

The
letters
stated
that
because
of
the
enhanced
premium
tax
credits,
monthly
premiums
for
marketplace
plans
have
been
reduced
by
an
average
of
$59
per
person.
In
addition,
a
record
21.4
million
people
enrolled
in
Marketplace
plans
for
the
2024
Open
Enrollment
Period.
They
also
had
a
substantial
impact
on
health
equity.
There
was
a
95%
increase
in
Marketplace
enrollment
among
Black
Americans
and
a
100%
increase
among
Hispanic
Americans
between
2020
and
2023,
the
members
of
Congress
argued.

“The
enactment
of
the
enhanced
[premium
tax
credits]
by
Congress
was
a
foundational
step
towards
keeping
health
care
premiums
low
and
putting
money
back
in
families’
pockets

and
our
work
is
just
getting
started,”
the
U.S.
representatives
stated.
“By
including
provisions
to
extend
the
enhanced
PTCs
in
the
soonest
possible
legislative
opportunity
and
creating
a
pathway
for
making
them
permanent,
we
can
finish
the
job
for
the
American
people
and
keep
quality
health
care
within
reach
for
our
constituents.
American
families
cannot
afford
to
go
back
to
paying
upwards
of
20%

or
more

of
their
household
income
on
health
care
premiums.

If
the
enhanced
premium
tax
credits
expire,
more
than
20
million
people
will
experience
an
increase
in
their
health
insurance
costs,
and
about
3
million
people
could
lose
their
coverage,
the
letters
argued. 

“The
enhanced
[premium
tax
credits]
have
protected
millions
of
Americans
from
higher
health
care
costs,
reduced
the
number
of
Americans
without
coverage,
provided
robust
choices
for
consumers
and
provided
stability
for
health
care
providers,
particularly
in
rural
areas,”
the
senators
said.
“It
is
clear
that
the
enhanced
PTCs
have
proven
to
be
an
overwhelming
success,
and,
as
millions
of
Americans
face
an
increase
in
their
insurance
costs,
it
is
time
to
make
the
investment
permanent.
We
strongly
urge
the
Senate
to
act
to
extend
this
financial
support
as
soon
as
possible.”  

While
research
shows
that
every
state
and
people
of
all
ages
and
income
will
see
higher
premiums
if
the
enhanced
premium
tax
credits
expire,
certain
groups
will
especially
be
impacted,
the
letters
argued.
This
includes
those
in
smaller
and
rural
states,
older
enrollees,
and
those
with
incomes
above
400%
of
the
federal
poverty
level.

“This,
in
turn,
would
strain
hospitals,
physicians,
nurses,
pharmacies
and
others
whose
care
would
continue
without
compensation,
compounding
pre-existing
problems,
and
could
be
disastrous
for
rural
and
underserved
communities,”
the
senators
said.


Photo:
santima.studio,
Getty
Images

Morning Docket: 09.23.24 – Above the Law

*
Judge
says
law
firm
“defiled
the
very
temple
of
justice.”
[Bloomberg
Law
News
]

*
Our
national
nightmare
is
over:
law
firm’s
Rosie
the
Ve-LAW-ciraptor
mascot
returned
after
being
stolen
two
years
ago.
[KWTX]

*
FTC
sues
pharmacies
over
measures
designed
to
inflate
insulin
prices.
[Reuters]

*
Law
school
deans
worried
about
California’s
future
bar
exam,
but
in
fairness
they
were
worried
about
its
past
bar
exam
so
this
is
an
ongoing
issue.
[ABA
Journal
]

*
Even
this
Supreme
Court
is
tired
of
dealing
with
Jill
Stein.
[Courthouse
News
Service
]

*
Is
distinguishing
between
website
advertising
and
social
media
advertising
the
same
as
putting
Big
Macs
and
Whoppers
in
separate
markets?
The
judge
in
the
Google
ad
case
didn’t
seem
to
think
so.
[Law360]

*
Judge
blasts
plaintiffs
in
intellectual
property
lawsuit
over
Meta’s
AI
training.
Lawyers
say
they’ll
bring
in
new
team.
See,
this
is
why
you
need
to
train
people
with
the
best
material
available.
[Corporate
Counsel
]

Lithuania may send fire engines intended for Zimbabwe to Ukraine


Source
: BNS,
a
news
agency
covering
the
Baltic
states;
European
Pravda


Details
:
“Yes,
a
pre-trial
investigation
is
being
conducted,
and
the
prosecutor
has
decided,
if
I’m
not
mistaken,
that
the
17
vehicles
that
were
to
be
shipped
to
Zimbabwe
should
be
confiscated
and
the
issue
of
their
possible
delivery
to
Ukraine
is
being
considered,”
said
Lithuania’s
Prosecutor
General
Nida
Grunskienė.

Last
week,
South
African
state-owned
news
website
The
Herald
urged
Lithuania
to
hand
over
17
vehicles
purchased
by
Zimbabwe
from
Belarus
last
year.

The
vehicles
were
detained
at
the
Klaipėda
seaport
in
March
last
year,
according
to
Zimbabwe’s
attorney
general.

“We
have
a
decision
by
the
prosecutor
in
which
we
are
informing
the
Zimbabwean
prosecutor’s
office
that
these
17
fire
engines
have
been
confiscated
because
the
company
that
manufactured
these
vehicles
is
subject
to
sanctions
and
Zimbabwe
itself
is
also
subject
to
sanctions,”
Grunskienė
noted.

She
said
the
African
state
had
also
been
informed
of
the
decision
through
diplomatic
channels.

“We
are
waiting
to
see
if
they
will
exercise
their
right
to
appeal,”
Grunskienė
added.

Notably,
Zimbabwe’s
attorney
general
visited
Lithuania
this
year
to
request
the
return
of
the
vehicles.


Background
:

  • Lithuania’s
    neighbour
    Latvia
    regularly donates cars
    confiscated
    from
    drunk
    drivers
    to
    Ukraine.
  • Former
    Latvian
    Prime
    Minister
    Krišjānis
    Kariņš
    (now
    serving
    as
    Latvia’s
    Foreign
    Minister)
    said
    in
    an
    interview
    with
    European
    Pravda
    that
    100%
    of
    Latvian
    society
    supports
    Ukraine, even
    those
    who
    drive
    under
    the
    influence
     of
    alcohol.