Category: News Feeds

Well, don’t we all feel better? Are you not reassured by the President’s little fireside chat last night?

No? HUH!

Funny enough, the stock market is also a bit dyspeptic this morning. After President Trump’s eleven-minute, scripted address to the nation, his aides spent the rest of the evening cleaning up a series of catastrophic factual errors that exacerbated the panic over COVID-19. You can watch the whole thing here, if you’re feeling masochistic.

Naturally Trump opened by patting himself on the back for “the most aggressive and comprehensive effort to confront a foreign virus in modern history” and then crapping on China and the E.U., claiming that “a large number of new clusters in the United States were seeded by travelers from Europe.” In normal times, we might not refer to our allies, who are, lest we forget, suffering and dying, as vectors of contagion. But in normal times, we’d probably give them a heads up before announcing a travel ban on national television.

These are not normal times.

To keep new cases from entering our shores, we will be suspending all travel from Europe to the United States for the next 30 days. The new rules will go into effect Friday at midnight. These restrictions will be adjusted subject to conditions on the ground. There will be exemptions for Americans who have undergone appropriate screenings.

Naturally, this set off a panic in Europe, where Americans and lawful permanent residents abroad raced to pay whatever it cost to get on the last plane out of Saigon De Gaulle, since the president very clearly said Americans weren’t getting back in without “appropriate screenings,” whatever that means.

Except, whoopsie!

It’s cool, you guys. The airlines will get right on those refunds … NEVER.

Trump continued:

These prohibitions will not only apply to the tremendous amount of trade and cargo, but various other things as we get approval. Anything coming from Europe to the United States is what we are discussing. These restrictions will also not apply to the United Kingdom.

Now, to the untrained observer, that might sound like Trump is cutting off imports from our biggest trading partner, effective immediately. But when he said “anything coming from Europe to the United States,” what Trump meant was only people.

Clearly those losers at the FTSE and the DAX, both of which dropped about 10 percent yesterday, really need to clean their ears! Did they not hear the president when he decreed that “This is not a financial crisis, this is just a temporary moment of time that we will overcome together as a nation and as a world?” Silly Europe!

Third time’s a charm?

Earlier this week, I met with the leaders of health insurance industry who have agreed to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments, extend insurance coverage to these treatments, and to prevent surprise medical billing.

Uhhhh, nope.

“The leaders at the White House for Tuesday’s industry meeting agreed to waive copays for testing not for treatment. Treatment is being considered a covered benefit in accordance with a person’s plan,” Kristine Grow, spokesperson for America’s Health Insurance Plans told CNBC’s Eamon Javers.

Meanwhile, we still have nowhere near enough tests to diagnose how far the virus has spread, and Mitch McConnell is refusing to pass Nancy Pelosi’s plan because “it proposes new bureaucracy that would only delay assistance.” Which seems to be code for, you guessed it, abortion.

Anyway, this is all fine.

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaay?

Remarks by President Trump in Address to the Nation [WH.gov, March 12, 2020]

---

Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics.

Earlier this week, Quinn Emanuel shuttered its New York office after one of the firm’s partners tested positive for coronavirus, enacting a work-from-home policy for all of its attorneys and staff. A day later, Faegre Drinker closed its offices worldwide and enacted a similar policy, if only for a short time, due to a coronavirus scare. All the while, attorneys and staff at other Biglaw firms were left wondering why their firms hadn’t taken any action yet when the technology is available to let them to do their jobs from safe spaces.

As luck would have it, another Biglaw firm has finally decided to allow its lawyers and staff to work from home — and the way they’re doing it is pretty interesting.

Yesterday, Weil Gotshal sent out a memo to let everyone know that the firm’s coronavirus policy had been updated to require mandatory work-from-home sessions on alternating weeks. To accomplish this, the firm will be split into two separate groups, with smaller groups venturing into the office every other week. The firm’s goal here is to minimize the risks of anyone contracting coronavirus through this social distancing program. Weil’s policy will be in effect until further notice.

Here’s an excerpt from the memo, which is available in full on the next page:

Work from Home:  Group A & Group B

Effective, Monday, March 16th, the Firm will assign all attorneys and administrative personnel into two groups:  Group A and Group B.  These groups will alternate working from home on a weekly basis (i.e., Group A will work from home the week of March 16th, Group B will work from home the week of March 23rd, etc.).  This is mandatory and may be adjusted as required outside the United States.  By Friday, March 13th, assigning partners and/or practice group leaders (for attorneys) and managers/supervisors (for administrative personnel) will inform members of their teams of their respective group assignment.

Any administrative staff member who believes that they cannot perform some or all of their regular job functions from home should consult with their immediate supervisor, who will be managing work flow and may be able to provide alternative projects.

Is Weil simply too big to have all of its personnel work from home at the same time? The firm has more than 1,100 lawyers and an untold number of staff. While this isn’t the perfect solution to the coronavirus exposure problem, at least Weil is doing something about it by offering all of its employees this option.

Congratulations to Weil Gotshal on being one of the first Biglaw firms to offer a way for its employees to continue working while staying safe during a pandemic.

What is your firm doing to protect lawyers and staff from coronavirus? Please text us (646-820-8477) or email us (subject line: “Coronavirus Response”). Stay safe.

---

Staci 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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Thanks to the global pandemic that is the coronavirus, it’s beginning to look a lot like 2008. The stock market plummeted for the second time this week, both times triggering circuit breakers to suspend all trading. Law schools have canceled in-person classes and have shifted to online coursework, some for the rest of the semester. Some law firms have shuttered offices, with others encouraging attorneys to work from home until further notice.

All of this upheaval got us to wondering what would happen to Biglaw summer associates. Of course, as noted by the American Lawyer, Biglaw firms have already interviewed law students and selected their incoming summer classes.

“We did our hiring for the summer [and] fall months and months ago,” said David Greenwald, managing partner at Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson. “That’s locked and loaded.”

Same for Washington, D.C.-based tax boutique Caplin & Drysdale, although the timing was closer.

“[On campus interviews] just finished, and the summer offers are out,” said firm administrator John Riggleman. “Three weeks back, it probably would have had a greater impact.”

But if the coronavirus sticks around, could we be facing a situation where upcoming summer programs are possibly postponed or canceled outright?

“On summer programs, while there may be some cancellations, I would be surprised to see mass cancellations due solely to COVID-19 concerns,” said Zeughauser Group consultant Kent Zimmermann. “The bigger issue in my mind is what happens to the macroeconomy. If there is a sustained macroeconomic downturn and it depresses demand for legal services, similar to what happened after Lehman Brothers, firms may cut back on their summer programs and other expenses, similar to what happened as a result of the financial crisis and its impact on the broader economy and the negative impact of that on demand for legal services.”

While some think they’re “going to get through this just fine,” law students who thought their careers were mapped out are growing increasingly worried. To that end, a Reddit post that has since been deleted detailed $24,000 payouts for law students from law firm that allegedly cut its summer program due to the coronavirus outbreak.

While we genuinely hope that things will work out, we are but a few weeks into what could be a very long journey when it comes to containment of the coronavirus and a potential recession that could drive the legal market into chaos.

Is your firm planning to hold its summer associate program as planned, despite coronavirus concerns? Please text us (646-820-8477) or email us (subject line: “Coronavirus Summer Associate Program”) and let us know. Stay safe.

How Coronavirus and a Bear Market Could Upend Law Firm Hiring [American Lawyer]

---

Staci 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 Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Just in time for Women’s History Month and International Women’s Day, Lawline’s fourth annual installment of our Top Women Faculty List puts a spotlight on some of the most amazing legal minds we have the pleasure of working with. These attorneys are at the top of the game in their practices – which range from health law to immigration to IP, and everything in between – and also masters of pedagogy. Online CLE can be a tough format to teach, but these superstars are making an impact on attorneys across the country. Our top women faculty are on the front lines of changes in technology, immigration, and more, providing practical, actionable advice that attorneys can implement immediately to grow in their careers. The women on this list taught some of the most-watched, highest rated programs Lawline produced in 2019 – and we are incredibly proud that we provided the platform for them to shine.

Without further ado, it is our pleasure to introduce our Top Women Faculty of 2019:

Michael Avenatti is supposed to have a pre-sentencing interview soon, but his attorney Scott Srebnick asked the judge yesterday to postpone that by at least 30 days because he thinks he could get COVID-19 at the jail. As both a lawyer and a blogger, let me just tip my hat because that’s a newsjacking truly worthy of induction into the clickbait Hall of Fame.

The request, made by letter to Judge Paul Gardephe, raises a number of concerns, but given the current media frenzy, the section on the coronavirus outbreak got the most attention:

Meanwhile, across the country, public officials are declaring states of emergency as a result of the spread of the Coronavirus. Flights are being canceled. Schools are closing. New protocols are being established for entry into federal courthouses. Health officials are uncertain of the actual risks, and, by all accounts, a prison facility poses among the highest risks of spread of infection.

Except health officials are pretty certain about the actual risks. Why do lawyers think overhyping this illness is necessary? It’s already pretty bad with the risks we understand, folks!

As one might suspect, this motion was denied immediately because, frankly, there’s nothing unique about the concerns he’s raising and taken to its logical conclusion, the letter posits that the criminal justice system should shut down for several months while prisoners languish in a diseased cesspool. But hopefully invoking COVID-19 because won’t overshadow the other complaints Srebnick raises in the letter, because MCC is a horrible, unsanitary mess:

The MCC lockdown led to even more cramped and unsanitary conditions at the jail. Inmates (including Mr. Avenatti) were permitted to shower only twice in 12 days. Many inmates lacked soap or hot water to wash their hands. Alcohol-based sanitizers are banned for use by inmates. Hot meals are being denied. Mr. Avenatti’s cell was infested with rats. The jail reeks of urine.

This is a breeding ground for disease, but you don’t need to jump to COVID-19 to make this point. You can catch airborne syphilis down there. It’s not a reason why lawyers shouldn’t be going to the prison at this time — it’s a reason why prisoners shouldn’t be kept in these conditions ever.

At least MCC isn’t using inmates as slave labor to make hand sanitizer… unlike some people.

Who knows if this was intentional on Srebnick’s part or not, but if it was, that’s what good newsjacking is. MCC’s unsanitary conditions aren’t moving the media needle as much as they should. If tying one of the most well-known lawyers on the planet — a potential repeat Lawyer of the Year — to COVID-19 gets more outlets to take seriously how appalling the conditions are there, then it’s worth it.

(Check out the letter/order on the next page.)

Michael Avenatti’s lawyer afraid to visit him in jail over coronavirus [NY Post]

Earlier: Authorities Have Thrown Michael Avenatti In The Hole — Attorney Asks To Move Him To Gen Pop
Who Was The 2019 Lawyer Of The Year?

---

Joe 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.

Have you ever had the thought that gun rights advocates had an unhealthy devotion to their cause? Or that free speech proponents are more than a little absolutist in their assessment of the issue? Maybe one or both of these constitutional diehards struck you as having a religious-like ferocity when engaging on the subject? Well, you’re not the only one.

In the latest episode of The Jabot podcast, I talk with Mary Anne Franks, a professor at the University of Miami Law School, about her new book, The Cult of the Constitution: Our Deadly Devotion to Guns and Free Speech. Together, we explore her thoughts on constitutional fundamentalism and the negative impacts that devotion can have.

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!

---

Kathryn 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).

You know that client confidentiality obligation lawyers have? The one that shapes how you meet with your clients, what you do online, and how hard you laugh at TV shows about lawyers? Therapists have that too. As the American Psychological Association explains, they need to guarantee confidentiality so that people will open up so the therapists can, you know, do their jobs.

So the psychiatric community was shocked last month when the Washington Post reported that the Trump administration has been using notes from immigrant minors’ therapy sessions against them in immigration court. Although this is a blatant violation of the APA’s Ethical Principles and a horrifying betrayal of vulnerable children’s trust, the Post reported that it’s not technically illegal because the therapists work for the Department of Health and Human Services, which stands in as a parent for unaccompanied immigrant minors.

“One of the big factors we consider is, are we putting the community at large at risk?” said Jallyn Sualog, deputy director for children’s programs at the relevant division of HHS, and a person who has to rationalize her choices somehow.

As a result, Democrats introduced a bill last week seeking to outlaw both HHS sharing therapists’ notes with ICE and ICE requesting them. They’ve also asked for a formal Inspector General investigation and written a couple of pointed letters. Apparently, they have a different take on responsible use of parental power.

The Washington Post story focuses on Kevin Euceda, who was 12 when his physically abusive, alcoholic grandmother died, and MS-13 gang members moved into his home. They forced him to work for them until he was 17, when he ran away because they ordered him to murder a stranger. With his older sister, he made his way from Honduras to south Texas, where he fell into the tender in loco parentis care of the Trump HHS.

Most of that information comes from conversations with Euceda’s first therapist, who told him (and probably believed) their conversations were confidential. However, she made the mistake of telling the truth to her supervisors, who used it as an excuse to transfer Euceda to a high-security detention center in Virginia that’s been accused of physical abuse and misuse of psychiatric drugs to keep kids “chemically restrained.” You know, like a good parent does. His new therapist there certified him as a victim of human trafficking, but that did not stop the Trump administration from using therapist notes to appeal all four of the immigration court decisions releasing him.

Euceda is now 20 and has spent more than 1,000 days in federal custody, with months more expected. As for HHS, Secretary Alex Azar (who has grown a beard, perhaps to signify that we are now in the evil mirror universe) told the Washington Post that this was just an oopsie that they’ve fixed. Because that’s what people do when they get caught.

---

Lorelei Laird is a freelance writer specializing in the law, and the only person you know who still has an “I Believe Anita Hill” bumper sticker. Find her at wordofthelaird.com.

We have, admittedly, been a bit skeptical about the, shall we say, seemingly over-the-top reaction to the coronavirus pandemic (officially, now). Without downplaying the seriousness of the spreading illness to vulnerable populations, it seemed like some sensible, moderate precautions—washing one’s hands until they bleed, keeping off of public transit and generally away from other people if one feels unwell, laying in a reasonable stock of necessary supplies should it be necessary for you to cool your heels for a couple of weeks, staying the hell away from Steve Cohen—was really all that was called for. Attempting to force each of the seven-and-a-half billion people on earth to stay at least six feet away from every single one of the other seven-and-a-half billion people on earth, cleaning out the local Costco of hand sanitizer and everything else, cancelling all flights and trains and taxi rides, and selling every single security you own frankly, seemed like a bit of an overreaction.

While media — in particular social media — seems unable to grasp this, it is possible to have a serious pandemic and not react with breathless panic. There’s an illness out there with no vaccine that spreads even when carriers are showing no symptoms. But it’s also not lethal for most of the population and — because it requires close contact to spread — fairly easily defeated by vigilant hygiene. All these things can be true!

All this is to say, that people need to lay off of Lawrence Garbuz, the New York attorney who tested positive for COVID-19 and currently has over 50 cases traced back to him. The state locked off New Rochelle due to the outbreak traced to Garbuz.

Speaking with the local NBC affiliate:

“I hope the Garbuz name becomes associated not as the ones with coronavirus but the ones who were instrumental in helping get this contained,” Adina Lewis Garbuz wrote on Facebook Tuesday afternoon. “I have not wanted to speak out as I have no urge to be in the limelight and I am sure my husband would be most horrified knowing he was, but I am willing to if it in any way can be helpful to others, to allay fears and restore feelings of calm.”

While you’d like to think we live in a society that doesn’t blame people for catching a disease, that’s sadly not where we are right now. Even charitably affording people the viewpoint that they aren’t blaming him for catching the disease, but for spreading it, this strikes at the principal danger of COVID-19: it spreads even when patients are showing few if any symptoms. None of this is Garbuz’s fault, so just cut him a break here. And remember that it takes two to tango here: wash your hands and keep some distance (though, no, you don’t need to become a hermit) and you’ll be alright even if the person down the hall has the bug unbeknownst to them.

In fairness, you should have been doing this the whole time. The flu is deadly to vulnerable populations too, so these hygienic measures shouldn’t stop even after this is eventually declared under control.

“It is easy to be fearful and scared and believe me, my family has been seen plenty of irrational bad behaviors based on it,” she said, referencing a laundromat that refused to serve her children despite them being out of the country and cleared by the Centers for Disease Control, or a nurse who “hugged the walls” as they walked by. But Lewis Garbuz implored that people not let emotion and fear control their behavior, writing that “We are in very unchartered (sic) waters with this virus and unknowns are scary but we also know quarantines and testing are helping. Let facts override bad thoughts.”

This is what a breakdown in public health information looks like. A government that wasn’t proposing a $1.2 billion cut to the CDC right now could be doing a lot more to keep people both safe and calm instead of letting panic run wild.

Not that the lawyers are helping the situation trying to substitute their judgment for doctors even though their failure to grasp organic chemistry is the only reason they became lawyers in the first place. And don’t think we haven’t noticed some of you suddenly lobbying for more restrictive government measures than the public health officials recommend. We see your clients’ force majeure clauses. We’ve got prominent political figures out here acting like the disease wouldn’t really exist if Trump weren’t president, which is dangerous levels of magical thinking. Not everything needs to be cast in absolutes — Trump’s failures can be pronounced without pretending he’s the cause of a worldwide outbreak.

Everyone just needs to stop. Listen to doctors. Keep clean and stay home if you’re sick or vulnerable. Don’t be a panicky jerk blaming people for catching something.

Wife of Lawyer at Center of NY COVID-19 Outbreak Urges Public Not to Blame Family [NBC 4]

---

Joe 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.