Adam Pulver

Maybe allowing law professors to engage with each other on social media was a bad thing

The ADL Cannot Lead on Civil Rights At its annual conference, the organization's Trump-aligned, right-wing Israel advocacy eclipsed its liberal agenda.

Signing off for the fast, but it seems like this may be relevant
jewishcurrents.org/the-adl-cann...

But pundits on social media said it was amazing!

Call me old fashioned, but I tend to think rambling opinions with extraneous musings are bad even when I agree with the holding.

I don't think her aggressive style in argument is remotely comparable to getting up and ranting about the legitimacy of the Court and morality of other opinions.

No no, the Supreme Court justices are just one more sick burn from a law professor podcast or slate think piece from changing their minds

I have attended a Lisa Blatt argument, thanks.

At best, the client is ok with you converting an oral argument into an opportunity for you to make the case about you and your smug self satisfaction

How would this benefit the client at all?

Which isn't just a personal loss, but a loss for the causes you believe in in which you can actually effect change as a litigator

I've had a lot of people ask me if I'd just rant at Justices of the Supreme Court in oral argument. But my duty is to a client, and shouting at Supreme Court justices wouldn't help the client, me, or anything else even if it would make me famous on social media

Law professor who lacks strong predictive abilities as to political outcomes mocks political commentator for same thing, tonight at 10.

Ad from Ted Frank, who has dedicated his life to his view that class actions are a threat to America, saying that class actions hurt Trump

When people show you who they are, believe them

A reminder that if you are seeing a rash of decisions from long-pending motions in federal courts this week and next, it's because of the 9/30 cut-off for reporting deadline under the Civil Justice Reform Act www.uscourts.gov/data-news/re...

Apropos to my recent vitality, I met with law students last week who couldn't believe I try to at least skim every published federal civil appellate decision, and do not listen to a single legal podcast or subscribe to any legal newsletters.

In a concurrence in a Title VII case today, one judge looks to ChatGPT in assessing whether a term is racially hostile. What could go wrong? www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf...

if you're a law professor it should be in your labor contract that you're not allowed to become a public intellectual

Federation of Employers and Workers of America v. Noem - Public Citizen The H-2A and H-2B visa programs allow employers to petition the Department of Homeland Security for visas on behalf of…

Second, in one of the rare challenges to a Biden-era pro-worker rule that the Administration is not collusively settling- an amicus brief explaining why a rule that protects migrant workers from unscrupulous employers is not vague or retroactive www.citizen.org/litigation/f...

Bradford v. Asian Health Services - Public Citizen After a data breach exposed some of his protected personal information, Ira Bradford brought a class action against Asian Health…

What sexy topics you may ask? First, removal and immunity under the Federally Supported Health Care Assistance Act and Federal Officer Removal Statute. Where's the podcast on *that*? www.citizen.org/litigation/b...

Have filed two briefs already today, so making sure 5785 goes out with a bang!

But Raffi, I thought winning at the Supreme Court was the only thing that matters in law

Bold: a party ordered to pay attorney's fees argued that years spent as a judicial law clerk do not count as legal work experience. Neither the magistrate or the district judge agreed:
ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show...

(Amicus briefs can be important! I write amicus briefs! Less than 1% of amicus briefs are media-worthy.)

Every email I receive from lawyers crowing about the filing of an amicus brief as a sign of a massive achievement and act of heroism takes a year off my life.

The two American political institutions most dedicated to making me cry are the Supreme Court and the telemarketing firm that random Democratic congressional candidates use to send me epic text tomes.

Yes I read that article in the Atlantic no I wont be commenting because I've been told not to say negative things on the internet

Not many, but CREW v. OMB media.cadc.uscourts.gov/orders/docs/...

Yeah I just ordered 50 KN95 masks; this fall/winter is gonna be a blast.

The ever-intriguing concurrence joined by the entire panel in the 2nd Circuit's rejection of a challenge to Connecticut's restrictions on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/is...