Fall Bonuses Are Great But Remember The Incoming Associates Struggling To Make It To Their Start Dates

(Image via Getty)

We’ve been treated to a string of good news from the biggest law firms in the world lately. Many have reversed the salary cutbacks instituted at the beginning of the COVID recession and several have brought joy to their associates with new Fall bonuses to sweeten the pot. Of course, not every firm is in the giving mood right now, but the clear momentum of the Biglaw universe is in favor of bonuses to reward attorneys who’ve managed to keep these firms profitable while the rest of society collapsed.

Lost in the autumn compensation news are the incoming first-year associates who have had their start dates put off as firms try to weather the storm. To some extent, this is a product of bar examiners continually pushing the exam farther into the future as disastrous wrinkles keep cropping up. But beyond the bar exam, firms just don’t want new associates joining up right now when they feel — rightly or wrongly — that they can’t properly train them remotely and worry that they don’t have enough work to get the recent grads engaged.

From the perspective of the firms, it’s not an absurd position. I entered as a first year while my firm huddled in borrowed office space after Cleary Gottlieb lost access to its offices being based next door to the World Trade Center and I never really felt like a functioning associate until we moved back into the real offices and I did actually have some semblance of in-person training. So I get why they don’t think adding people right now is feasible.

For the future associates themselves though, this is brutal. Some law firms are paying these folks who expected to start working, but many more are just offering salary advances… or nothing at all. While no one is complaining about having walking around money at this point, advances really just amount to asking associates to further borrow against their future interests, something they’ve functionally been doing for three years — if not seven — already. Deferring the hit they’re taking right now over the next few years is better than nothing, but amounts to yet another roadblock to getting started as financially independent beings.

Worse, law school health coverage is coming to an end for a lot of these graduates and some law firms aren’t stepping up to at the very least add incoming associates to the plan during a pandemic. This obviously isn’t true of all firms — checking the ATL tracker, it looks like Reed Smith and Troutman Pepper have enrollment options and Orrick is offering a health care stipend (perhaps others… this is a reminder for firms to let us know so we can highlight you) — but firms that haven’t offered this as a minimum have put grads in the position of trying to find health insurance, which can often still leave people uncovered with arbitrary beginning and end dates.

Imagine sitting at the end of September with no job until at least January, going further in debt, without health insurance, and with bar examiners saying this seems like a perfectly reasonable time to take a slapdash test.

And then imagine hearing that your firm is handing everyone already over there a big bonus. This isn’t meant to begrudge the associates who’ve busted their asses to keep billing from home, but we should take a second or two to consider the impossible circumstances we’re foisting upon the class of 2020.


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Practicing Law During COVID-19: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly

Most courts around the country have put criminal trials on hold since late March. That’s a long time to spend in jail waiting for your day in court, especially when there’s no clear notion on when that day might come.

New York City is slowly rolling out a program to “reopen” court, but as of now it’s fitful at best — only 10 cases a day in most court parts — as compared to as many as 150 before COVID-19.

Pilot programs are being considered on when and how to convene the first full-scale, post-COVID criminal trial with 12 jurors and several alternates. But as one judge told me last week, “The jurors sure won’t be sitting in the jury box cheek-to-cheek.” No, they’ll be scattered around the court room, separated by at least six feet, wearing masks and seated behind prosecution and defense. Not a great way to gauge their reactions.

The witnesses will be that much further from them, in the well next to the judge.  Acoustics are already poor in the cavernous courtrooms, but picture a spread-out jury trying to hear people behind plexiglass barriers, speaking behind masks. No lip reading possible. Seems like a situation ripe for reversable error.

I conducted my first post-COVID suppression hearing last week. It was pretty clear-cut. My client made a full confession but hadn’t been read his Miranda rights until after he was questioned. His rights were then read on camera at which time the confession was repeated.

The detective was the key and only witness. He walked into court wearing a Darth Vader-like clear face mask pulled over his face. It made him look more like a welder than a cop.

The court reporter sat nestled in her plexiglass booth and the judge behind enough layers of plexi to ward off a swarm of bees. I was separated from my client by at least six feet. Much of the proceeding was interrupted by interjections of, “I didn’t catch that word.” “Can the witness speak louder?” “Was that “detection” or “inspection?””

Thank God there was no interpreter. In another proceeding I handled recently, the interpreter had to stand six feet from the client who couldn’t hear a word she said. It worked as well as the Cone of Silence in “Get Smart.”  Ultimately, they both shouted into their cellphones to handle the interpreting.

What’s good about post-COVID court? Well, it felt great to get back to work, back on the horse, back inside a courthouse cross-examining witnesses and seeing a case go forward.

The judge ruled no differently than he would have in ordinary times. He denied suppression — a legal error in my mind, but one I won’t be able to contest until the case goes to trial and my client is likely convicted. (For some crazy reason I thought the post-COVID awakening to #BlackLivesMatter might nudge judges to view police more skeptically. But that hasn’t happened.)

Post-COVID court adds features to trial work both sides will have to contend with. Wearing masks, for example, has benefits and disadvantages. I like a jury to see my client full face. It humanizes him. God knows they’ll be seeing his mug shot introduced into evidence. Nice to have that countered with the face of a real person sitting in front of them.

But having a detective wear a silly-looking face covering isn’t great for the prosecution. It cuts back on his ability to be charming, convincing, and all-knowing — something always helpful to defense.

I like sitting next to my client and being able to whisper a word into his ear.  That’s a big loss if we can’t get more than six feet apart. But the good side is having him that far away curtails his ability to interrupt my focus, take notes, and solidify my cross. Every front has a back.

Whatever the obstacles and changes, trials have to get restarted. Until and unless judges are going to seriously reconsider setting lower bail or approve ankle bracelets over jail, it’s not fair to leave thousands of people behind bars promising that someday “soon” trials will restart.

The backlog of cases awaiting trial is already huge and only getting bigger.  None of the plans to restart trials may be ideal, but everyone’s going to have to get used to features they don’t like. (And I’m not even touching on the issue of how COVID-19 will likely impact the likelihood of a jury representative of the community.)

But something’s got to happen. Jailed defendants can’t sit in limbo forever.


Toni Messina has tried over 100 cases and has been practicing criminal law and immigration since 1990. You can follow her on Twitter: @tonitamess.

Biglaw Firm’s Latest Racial Equality Work

In the initial aftermath of the murder of George Floyd, lots of Biglaw firms talked a good game about racial justice in this country. But now that a few months have gone by, we wonder, what have they actually done to work towards those lofty goals?

In the latest episode of The Jabot, I interview Arent Fox partner Eva J. Pulliam about the firm’s newly launched Center For Racial Equality. We chat about the creation of the Center and what motivated the firm to do so, what the firm’s role is in racial equality, and what are the goals of the center and the projects they’re initially focused on.

The Jabot podcast is an offshoot of the Above the Law brand focused on the challenges women, people of color, LGBTQIA, and other diverse populations face in the legal industry. Our name comes from none other than the Notorious Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the jabot (decorative collar) she wears when delivering dissents from the bench. It’s a reminder that even when we aren’t winning, we’re still a powerful force to be reckoned with.

Happy listening!


headshotKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. 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).

If American Democracy Dies, Trump’s Republicans Won’t Mourn It

At a campaign rally earlier this month in Fayetteville, North Carolina, Donald Trump told the crowd, “You can’t have [Biden] as your president … Maybe I’ll sign an executive order: You cannot have him as your president.”

Leaving aside the unconstitutionality of such an order or of Trump remaining in office beyond two terms, as he has also suggested, most disturbing was attendees’ response these statements: not the horror one would expect in a healthy democracy or laughter suggesting the naive presumption he was joking, but cheers and applause.

Under Trump’s leadership, the GOP is now well into the final stretch of its transformation from a mainstream center-right party into a far-right authoritarian one, bearing less resemblance even to the GOP of 20 years ago than to Hungarian autocrat Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party. That’s not to say all Republicans are hostile to democracy. But as evidenced by the defections of prominent conservatives like columnist George Will, former Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh, Bush administration aide Steve Schmidt, and others, it’s not the party of democratically inclined conservatives anymore.

Instead, the GOP is now the party of willing participants in Trump’s brazen assaults on democracy and human rights and the cowards who let them happen. It’s the party of credulous Archie Bunker slobs who applaud his unconstitutional fantasies. It’s the party of neo-fascist thugs like the Proud Boys and gun-toting militias. It’s the party of soulless Twitter trolls who make careers out of “owning the libs” — usually through bad-faith, hypocritical argumentation and bigotry meant to conceal their lack of original ideas — or promote absurd conspiracy theories like QAnon. It’s the party of propaganda disguised as news from outlets like Fox News, OANN, Breitbart, and The Federalist. It’s the party of white people who get mad at football players taking a knee or at Black Lives Matter protests and wave thin blue line flags to proudly proclaim their indifference to — or support for — racist police violence.

In sum, the party of Lincoln has become a proto-junta that in the mid-20th century would have been branded a fifth column and hauled before HUAC.

Maybe you think that’s unfair, but lest you doubt there’s an authoritarian vogue among Republicans and those adjacent to them, consider this snapshot of events since late August:

  • At the Republican National Convention, the party substituted for a platform a resolution that read, “the Republican Party has and will continue to enthusiastically support the President’s America-first agenda.” In other words, “Le Parti, c’est Trump”;
  • Trump has refused to commit to a peaceful transition of power should he lose the election, as his administration reportedly seeks to bypass election results entirely;
  • Leaked chats showed pro-Trump activists in Portland acquiring arms and ammunition, planning and training for violence, naming multiple Oregon politicians as possible assassination targets;
  • The Department of Justice declared Portland, Seattle and New York “anarchist jurisdictions” and pledged to strip them of federal funding over Trump’s distaste for their approaches to police brutality and racism;
  • Trump, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson and commentator Ann Coulter defended or even praised Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old arrested in a shooting during the Kenosha, Wisconsin, Black Lives Matter protests that left two dead and one seriously wounded, with a gun he was carrying illegally after traveling across state lines;
  • At a campaign rally in Bemidji, Minnesota, Trump called it “beautiful” when MSNBC reporter Ali Velshi was hit with a rubber bullet while covering unrest in Minneapolis after the killing of George Floyd by police. He also told the nearly all-white crowd they have “good genes.”

Now, consider that Richard Nixon lost much of the Republican Party’s support for offenses that paled in comparison to Trump’s. But what happens when Trump scorns and disregards democratic norms, traumatizes innocent children, snatches protesters off the street, cozies up to dictators and even admits on tape to lying about the severity of a pandemic that — thanks to his negligence — has now killed over 200,000 Americans and wrecked the economy? Polls report his job approval rating among Republicans remains at least in the mid to high 80s. Even his refusal to commit to a peaceful transition of power was met with, at best, muted criticism from prominent Republicans and a unanimous but toothless Senate resolution.

The unavoidable conclusion is that for all their lip service to the Constitution and patriotism, a large chunk of Republicans — from the party brass down to the rank and file — has abandoned liberal democracy, whether out of active hostility or preoccupation with enjoying tax cuts and other personal benefits of Trump’s presidency.

And a new report indicates this is a major cause of America backsliding into autocracy, potentially to the point of no return.

In a new report, Varieties of Democracy, or V-Dem, a group of international scholars that measures the health of democracy around the world, stated that the U.S. is experiencing “significant and substantial autocratization.” And according to The Washington Post, American democracy’s decline has reached a point that usually leads to full autocracy.

Citing Hungarian sociologist Balint Magyar’s theory of democracy giving way to autocracy in three stages — attempt, breakthrough, and consolidation — New York writer Masha Gessen has identified Trump’s 2016 election as an autocratic attempt, while reelection would mark autocratic breakthrough, followed by consolidation of his autocratic power. I wish I could say Gessen’s fears are overblown, but I don’t see any substantial Republican resistance to Trump’s authoritarianism.

Perhaps the party would be more inclined to preserve democracy if it were more confident in its long-term ability to win elections fairly.

In an article in the December 2019 issue of The Atlantic, Yoni Appelbaum wrote that with white Christians on their way to becoming a political minority due to America’s increasing ethnic and racial diversity, the Republican Party is losing faith that it can win elections in the future. And a study by Vanderbilt University researcher Larry Bartels found that antagonism toward Blacks, Latinos, and immigrants was the strongest predictor of antidemocratic attitudes among Republican and Republican-leaning independent voters.

But rather than getting with the times, the GOP engineers the political system through voter suppression and extreme gerrymandering so it can’t lose, using appeals to white Christian grievance and attacks on minorities to ensure the fanatical loyalty of its base.

Fidesz has successfully used similar tactics to undo Hungary’s democracy while tapping that country’s own sordid history of racism with attacks on Roma, antisemitic dog whistles against George Soros and scaremongering about Muslim refugees. The V-Dem report describes Hungary as an “electoral authoritarian regime” and thus non-democratic. The Republican Party under Trump is turning the U.S. into something similar, while the president himself exacerbates divisions that threaten to violently tear the whole country asunder.

And the rest of the world looks on with shock and dismay. But unlike Europe, Asia, and Latin America, the U.S. isn’t a mere generation or two removed from tyranny or war on its soil. My boyfriend comes from a former Soviet republic and has vivid memories of the USSR’s collapse, followed by years of civil war, deprivation, and dictatorship. His stories are the stuff of nightmares and show that anyone who would let the same things happen in the U.S. and prefer burning the nation down over sharing its abundance with people who are different recklessly takes our democracy, stability, tranquility, prosperity, and global standing for granted and doesn’t comprehend what they’re wishing for.

But with Donald Trump leading his party and country down the dark path of autocracy and armed thugs prepared to kill for him, it’s we true patriots of all political stripes standing up for the bedrock values of our country who would suffer the consequences of their death wish for democracy.

Yes, The SEC Has Noticed The Swarm Of SPACs Crawling All Over Wall Street

Morning Docket: 09.28.20

* Lawyers argued yesterday that a TikTock ban would be “devastating.” Many would definitely be devastated if they couldn’t see humorous videos during the quarantine… [Verge]

* A lawyer at Debevoise and Plimpton has had his protest-related charges dropped. [American Lawyer]

* Google’s parent company has settled a lawsuit claiming that it failed to properly handle sexual misconduct allegations against executives. [CNBC]

* The Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office will not prosecute a journalist who is accused of interfering with an arrest earlier this month. [New York Times]

* The New York Attorney General is suggesting that the NYPD stop making routine traffic stops. Unclear if this will have any impact on the always-congested FDR Drive… [AP]


Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

The U.S. Dominates At The Richest Law Firms In The World

(Image via Getty)

Ed. Note: Welcome to our daily feature Trivia Question of the Day!

According to the 2020 Global 100 ranking, which is the only firm in the top 10 of the ranking that does not have the majority of its lawyers in the United States?

Hint: These are the top 10 firms ranked by 2019 revenue, and only #5 on the list has its largest presence outside the U.S.

See the answer on the next page.

90-Day Known Expert: Week 2 Roundup

Lawyer Forward continues with its series exploring how lawyers can transform themselves into “known experts” in 90 days. The second week’s episodes include “Focus on Insights,” “Positioning Problems,” “Defeating Impostor Syndrome,” and “A Habit of Idea Generation.”

Make sure you take advantage of the show’s Q&A feature. You can ask Mike questions about the latest episode and he’ll answer at the end of the next episode. Just submit your question in the form at the bottom of this post.

Additional Lawyer Forward Known Expert resources

Charge Your Lawyer


Olga V. Mack is the CEO of Parley Pro, a next-generation contract management company that has pioneered online negotiation technology. Olga embraces legal innovation and had dedicated her career to improving and shaping the future of law. She is convinced that the legal profession will emerge even stronger, more resilient, and more inclusive than before by embracing technology. Olga is also an award-winning general counsel, operations professional, startup advisor, public speaker, adjunct professor, and entrepreneur. She founded the Women Serve on Boards movement that advocates for women to participate on corporate boards of Fortune 500 companies. She authored Get on Board: Earning Your Ticket to a Corporate Board Seat and Fundamentals of Smart Contract Security. You can follow Olga on Twitter @olgavmack.