Judge Sooknanan is giving a master class in judging during the Trump Administration -- but really in how judges should always value the people whose lives are affected by their decisions.
01.09.2025 15:46 β π 372 π 65 π¬ 2 π 0@tjanger.bsky.social
David M. Barse Professor at Brooklyn Law School. I write and teach about bankruptcy, commercial law, consumer protection, contracts, and torts.
Judge Sooknanan is giving a master class in judging during the Trump Administration -- but really in how judges should always value the people whose lives are affected by their decisions.
01.09.2025 15:46 β π 372 π 65 π¬ 2 π 0Law Review: @dalie.bsky.social , Missing Strugglers: Debt's Reach, Bankruptcy's Limits, and a Proxy for Who's Left Out (July 31, 2025). dlvr.it/TMbV4n
20.08.2025 18:57 β π 2 π 2 π¬ 1 π 0Not defending tariffs (at all), but the story is a bit more complicated: βThe British Parliament passed the Tea Act in May 1773 to help the company. This gave the East India Company a tax break on their tea, which made it cheaper than tea that was being smuggled into the colonies from other places.β
10.08.2025 11:39 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0PPP convening flyer. Yellow background. Black text reads "Annual Convening; Unf*ck the Law; Phoenix Park Hotel, 520 North Capitol St. NW, Washington, DC; June 27β29, 2025; Join the People's Parity Project for our annual national convening. Law students, lawyers & organizers welcome! People's Parity Project."
π¨ Registration is LIVE! π¨
There has never been a more important time for pro-people, pro-democracy lawyers and law students to get organized.
actionnetwork.org/ticketed_eve...
Meritocracy is a myth; but basic competence would be refreshing.
21.05.2025 19:48 β π 3 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0"President Trumpβs China tariffs are threatening Christmas." www.nytimes.com/2025/04/29/b....
29.04.2025 18:36 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0It has nothing to do with antisemitism.
Thatβs a coverβfor whatever the heck they want to do.
And using Jews as a partisan ploy? THATβS antisemitic.
Law students say they want to work for the firms standing up to Trump www.politico.com/news/2025/04...
14.04.2025 02:43 β π 103 π 36 π¬ 2 π 2βAnyone who knows Susman Godfrey knows we believe in the rule of law, and we take seriously our duty to uphold it,β the firm said on Wednesday. βThere is no question that we will fight this unconstitutional order.ββ
10.04.2025 22:42 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0βOn Wednesday, Mr. Trump hit another firm, Susman Godfrey, with an executive order. The firm, which plans to fight Mr. Trumpβs order, represented Dominion, a manufacturer of voting machines that lawyers allied with Mr. Trump falsely attacked.β
10.04.2025 22:42 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0As one would predict re Susman (and others). www.nytimes.com/2025/04/10/u...
10.04.2025 22:41 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0Now we get to see what happens when they sue a litigation boutique (Susman, Godfrey).
10.04.2025 02:10 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0Whelp, this "event study" appears to be bearing out your hypothesis: www.law.com/newyorklawjo...
01.04.2025 20:42 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0This song is stuck in my head today: Arlo Guthrie singing a song by his dad youtu.be/qu-duTWccyI?...
01.04.2025 14:44 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0One key lesson of the PW and Skadden debacles may be that a law firm should not let their transactional lawyers determine their litigation tacticsβ¦
29.03.2025 14:00 β π 13 π 1 π¬ 0 π 2WilmerHale was polite, professional, and direct.
BigLaw could learn. Now, WilmerHale needs to actually fight this thing out. These orders are blatantly, insanely unconstitutional.
Less than 10 state bar associations signed onto this ABA statement in support of the rule of law? www.americanbar.org/news/abanews...
26.03.2025 21:58 β π 0 π 1 π¬ 2 π 0Statement of U.S. law deans, 26 March 2025
26.03.2025 19:57 β π 1 π 1 π¬ 0 π 0Re-upping this!! It's going to be great. If you want to see the full agenda, and/or RSVP, here's the link: www.brooklaw.edu/news-and-eve...
26.03.2025 19:54 β π 5 π 1 π¬ 0 π 0To this end, the firm seeks to attract lawyers reflecting a wide variety of religious, political, ethnic, cultural, gender, sexual orientation and social backgrounds characteristic of the city of its home."
26.03.2025 19:40 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Its partners are committed to providing excellence in the rendition of legal services at the pinnacle of the profession while remaining actively engaged in matters of social consequence.
26.03.2025 19:40 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0The firmβs governance is dedicated to the principle of one partner/one vote, no matter seniority or client appeal, and to universal service in all aspects of firm administration, with attendant transparency in firm management and collegiality in firm culture.
26.03.2025 19:40 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0through such practice to earn a living and to derive the stimulation and pleasure of worthwhile adventure; and in all things to govern ourselves as members of a free democratic society with responsibilities both to our profession and our country.β
26.03.2025 19:40 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0"The goal, Simon Rifkind wrote in 1963 in the Statement of Firm Principles, is βto achieve the highest order of excellence in the practice of the art, the science and the profession of the law; backgrounds characteristic of the city of its home."
26.03.2025 19:40 β π 2 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0<saves to show FOIA office>
25.03.2025 14:58 β π 6590 π 1066 π¬ 216 π 50WARNER: βWere you in the group chat?β
GABBARD: βI wonβt get into specifics.β
WARNER: βIs that because itβs classified?β π― π₯
Warner rightly dragging them for an unbelievable situation. πͺ
Hate having to share a Substack, but here's one to read.
Anyways, the "Not in Our Name" letter has been signed by more than 2,600 US Jewish academics (I'm #144). And frankly, I don't know if there's ever been that much collective consensus by Jews about... anything. docs.google.com/document/d/1...
A friendβs disgusted reaction to Paul, Weiss:
βSo many non-profit lawyers have been so busy working on cases against the unconstitutional actions of the Administration, because the big firm lawyers with multiple houses and cars and boats and every other damn thing are too fucking weak to do it.β
Just to be clear, the executive branch has no constitutional authority to refuse a court appearance on the ground of a unilateral determination that the law favors the presidentβs position. If the courts donβt push back, the rule of law, always precarious, never perfectly realized, is dead.
17.03.2025 20:50 β π 23 π 6 π¬ 1 π 0One word: Filibuster! www.schumer.senate.gov/contact/mess...
14.03.2025 00:35 β π 1 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0