BC LEGAL
Saved by @Mollyycolllinss

Yes, I'm laser focused on how lawyers lead—how we *learn* to lead—as I prep to teach just this to @vanderbiltlaw students, and . . .

As I read @jaesunum's post on @Legal_Ev, all I can think: we are failing to train lawyers to make these important moral (yes, moral) decisions.👇

 I genuinely question whether we train law students and lawyers to operate in the way Jae urges us to.

Note, I agree with Jae: "Big business and their legal counsel have the opportunity to steer capitalism to a gentler and fairer recovery, but the clock is ticking.
👇
The reckoning we face in the post-pandemic reality is not one of cancel culture but widespread calamity and increasing risk to our lives and livelihoods."

Both the opportunity and obligation (yes, I believe it is an obligation) we in law face are enormous.

And,
we lawyers are for the most part completely unprepared.

To wit: we do not train new lawyers for this world. We continue to train them primarily for the 2nd industrial revolution, which ended 100+ years ago.

"The intrinsic tension between BigLaw’s growth imperative
: 👇
(read: make more money) and corporate legal’s perpetual grind to do more with less (read: spend less money) is bad for our industry. The resulting distraction, however, is bad for the world. It’s long past time to ask the really important questions.

👇
Why is corporate misconduct on the rise? How do we reverse the trend? How do lawyers working at the biggest companies and law firms in the world actually leave that world a better place?" - @jaesunum https://t.co/ZxbwaMFi3F

Are we asking law students these questions?

👇
Are we asking lawyers these questions?

Are we incentivizing or prioritizing behavior and choices in legal professionals responsive to these questions?

Are we giving law students and lawyers tools to be contributors to solutions that address these challenges?

👇
Are we giving them tools to LEAD in this way?

I submit that, for the most part, we are not.

In fact, I observe we teach law students things that lead them in the opposite direction. And the training and incentives they encounter in corporate law firms?

👇
Generally calcifies our focus in a way that little room for
our movement in the direction Jae urges—and I believe our world demands.

We train lawyers with a very, very narrow view of their role in society. And then we impart great power (and obligation).

👇
We should not be surprised at our failings. AND we should be taking action to rectify the vast disparity between what we do (or what we *think* we do) and what current reality demands of us.

For decades, the late Deborah Rhode asked all of us to acknowledge and address

👇
this very issue: lawyers lead and we need them to lead, and lead well.

AND, we do very little (if anything) to prepare them for THIS. For leadership. For MORAL leadership. See "What Lawyers Lack: Leadership" https://t.co/OpixXwneqx.

What is the inflection point 👇
that will finally move us to action?

How bad does it really need to get?

I fear our proclivities (risk averse, skeptical, precedent-driven vs. forward-thinking) continue to constrain our evolution in ways that have dire consequences not only on the legal profession,
:dow 👇
but on the fabric of human society.

As battles wage over the regulatory structure of the legal profession, a truth remains: law is the operating system of human society.

And, even when we allow and empower others to fulfill meaningful, necessary roles in this system,
👇
the role of lawyers as leaders will remain.

The choices we make now — about how we (self)regulate, about how we (self)educate, about how we choose to fulfill our duties and obligations — have consequences so far beyond our current purview

👇
that we should be laser-focused on how we respond with a creative and proactive mindset to the enormous challenges and opportunities before us.

Lawyers: how will YOU lead?

/fin

More from Legal

Jean Flemma
Jean Flemma
@jeanflemma
My rage has not abated, it has grown. I worked on the Hill on 9/11 & when 2 police officers were tragically killed by a madman with a gun--surprise attacks that lead to dramatic security increases. BILLIONS have been spent to protect OUR house-the people's house. And yet...1/

This attack--planned in plain site by a bunch of morons who had merch!--was carried out with little resistance. Think about it, the seditious mob brought and built a gallows and platform with 6x6 beams at OUR capitol. This required some planning.

They had ladders! Are you telling me they walked up with ladders and no one thought, "uh oh, shit's getting real?"

📷 Eric Lee/Bloomberg/Getty Images 3/


They had zip ties and flex cuffs to handcuff people! Who were they planning to take hostage and thank god they were not successful. 4/


The had SLEDGEHAMMERS???
LEGAL
Zoe Tillman
Zoe Tillman
@ZoeTillman
A detention hearing is about to start in federal court in Arkansas in the case of Richard Barnett, the man photographed sitting in Nancy Pelosi's office (see: https://t.co/GAAENhkxf0). He's been in custody since his arrest

Prosecutors alleged Barnett was carrying a stun gun. He's charged with entering a restricted area w/ a weapon, violent entry/disorderly conduct, and theft. There isn't anything on the docket indicating what the govt/Barnett will be seeking as far as detention v. release


We're still waiting for the Richard Barnett detention hearing to start in Arkansas. Meanwhile, follow @o_ema for updates on initial appearances in DC federal court today for a few of the Capitol insurrection arrestees -->


Richard Barnett's detention hearing is underway in Arkansas — Judge Erin Wiedemann will decide if Barnett should stay behind bars. The first witness is FBI special agent Jonathan Willett, who was involved in the Capitol riot investigation

FBI agent walks the judge through surveillance videos that the agent says show Barnett walking in and out of Nancy Pelosi's office, with a "walking stick Taser" on his hip, as well as the widely disseminated photos of Barnett sitting in Pelosi's chair with his feet up
LEGAL
Advertisement
BoozyBarrister
BoozyBarrister
@BoozyBarrister
Let's remember that L. Lin Wood - according to a lawsuit filed by three attorneys who worked with/for him - allegedly called them to his house at 1 a.m. in the midst of a personal crisis, they sat with him to make sure he was okay, and tthe next day he fired them all via email.


Let's also recall that, shortly thereafter, according to the same Complaint, it is alleged he held a 3.5 hour phone call wherein he - again according to the Complaint - verbally berated these attorneys nonstop.


Then proceeded, the attorneys who worked with him allege, to send multiple abusive email messages to them with unhinged ramblings about Almighty God guiding him.


Note: Literally ANY email that includes the words "you are the ones who are crazy, not me" is immediately suspect.

Sidenote: Voicemails that insist an action seems crazy but really isn't and makes completely sense are, in my general experience with domestic abuse cases, red flags.
LEGAL
Dr. Alexander Hamilton | Alter Ego: AHAM
Dr. Alexander Hamilton...
@DrAlexHamilton
WHEN WAKANDA FALLS

I need U 2 get just how horrible this is. Incoming black DA in Wakanda, I meant Atlanta, just voluntarily turned over 2 a white Repub AG, the Rashard Brooks case, a black man who was gunned down by a white cop in a Wendy's drive thru.

She also turned over another case involving excessive force of 2 black college students to the white Republican AG as well. Her reasoning is that the previous black DA behaved unethically. Here's the thing. She actually prosecuted the white cop that killed Rashard Brooks years-

ago in an excessive case force 4 which she dropped the charges then. How in the fuck do Wakandans, I meant Atlantans, elect some1 with this history? Here's the bigger picture. Her predecessor was no better. He actually prosecuted black teachers in the ATL Public Schools cheating-

scandal. Wonderful right? If you a dumb mafucka that answered yes, unfollow me now & never utter my name again. For all others, here is a good lesson in politics & why I have no hope of black people ever moving the needle one inch against white supremacy.

Let's say for arguments sake the teachers were cheating. Let's say black Atlanta officials are corrupt. Lets say Atlanta Airport officials are corrupt. If you are Atlanta's DA, do you prosecute them? Before I answer that question, riddle me this, do you think white people would-
LEGAL
Kyle Becker
Kyle Becker
@kylenabecker
CAPITOL SIEGE FACTS.🚨

• FBI alerted Congress
• Ex-Police Chief warned SIX TIMES
• Attack *PRE-PLANNED* (not "incited")
• Dem. removed 'panic buttons'
• Weak National Guard, police presence
• Leftist agitators in crowd
• Protesters 'let in' building

THIS IS ALL SUSPECT.
LEGAL

You May Also Like

Emperor\U0001f451
Emperor👑
@EmperorBTC
Technical Analysis Masterclass- Part 2

'Entering the trade'

Entering a trade without ascertaining a certain things is gambling.

In this masterclass we will learn the pre-requisites to enter a trade.

DON'T ENTER A TRADE WITHOUT DETERMINNG THE FOLLOWING.

Please share.

We understand what reward to risk (popularly called risk to reward) is.
It will be denoted by R:R.

We will also try to bust a few myths about R:R and how to avoid losing trades.

Before entering a trade, you need to determine 3 things.

1. Entry trigger
2. Stop loss
3. Target

1. Entry trigger = Reasons for entering a trade. There could be multiple reasons or a single reason for entry.

Generally a set of reasons AKA confluence is a higher probability trade and a generally a safer entry.

Example of an entry trigger.


2. Stop Loss.

The price in the opposite direction of the trade where the trade is exited, at a loss.

At this level, the reason for the entry becomes invalidated according to TA and the price can then move in the opposite direction, probabilistically.


3. Target is the possible price level that the asset might touch based on previous trends or confluence AND where a possible reversal could occur.

Target is the next path of least resistance from where the price might reverse.

We will always ONLY use TA to determine all 3.
TRADING
Emma Hilton
Emma Hilton
@FondOfBeetles
This is Kuinini ‘Nini’ Manumua, the woman who was ultimately displaced by inclusion of Laurel Hubbard.

She’s 21, and it would have been her first Olympics.
ALL
Advertisement
Karol296
Karol296
@Karol296
Wracając do sedna dzisiejszego zamieszania z artykułem autosportu / motorsportu. Kubica mówi w nim, że podejmie swoją decyzję w ciągu kilku dni. Rozważa opcję z Williamsem lub posadę kierowcy symulatora w Ferrari. Więc za kilka dni dowiemy się co go czeka za rok. #F1PL

Autosport / motorsport zmienił nagłówek swoje tekstu, bo pierwotnie sugerował on że Kubica jest numerem jeden na liście Williamsa na tytuł mówiący tylko tym, że nadal jest na liście kandydatów. Zrobili to po interwencji zespołu. Same wypowiedzi Kubicy z wywiadu się nie zmieniły.

Trudno powiedzieć czy autor się pośpieszył i wyciągnął inne wnioski niż powinien, a może wie coś więcej, ale nie mógł tego otwarcie napisać. Słowa Kubicy brzmią jednak jednoznacznie: decyzję podejmie w ciągu kilku dni.
SPORT
\u0100yudhika
Āyudhika
@Satyamev1310
Dr. Anandibai Joshi

Upon her birth on 31 March 1865 she was named Yamuna, after the holy river. Her parents Gunputrao Amritaswar Joshee & Gungabai Joshee came from a long lineage of wealthy landlord family in Kalyan of Bombay Presidency, whose wealth was now waning.


Anandi was the sixth of 10 children, & had 4 brothers (only two of which survived) & five sisters. Her father was particularly fond of her, as she was a bright child with an inquisitive mind. Being an educated man himself, Ganpatrao assured that his daughter was taught Marathi.

As was common practice she was married at a tender age of 9, to Gopalrao Joshi, a 29 year old widower who worked as a postal clerk in the same city. After marriage her husband named her ‘Anandibai’ (which means ‘Joy of my heart’).

Gopalrao was man ahead of his times with reformist ideas & had married Anandibai on the condition that he would be allowed to educate his wife.

He even tried to enroll Anandi in a missionary school, but did not succeed. Despite being the supportive husband, Gopalrao had his flaws.

He was a strict teacher & would sometimes resort to beating if Anandi slacked in her studies.
ALL
Steve Stewart-Williams
Steve Stewart-Williams
@SteveStuWill
THREAD: 12 Things Everyone Should Know About IQ

1. IQ is one of the most heritable psychological traits – that is, individual differences in IQ are strongly associated with individual differences in genes (at least in fairly typical modern environments). https://t.co/3XxzW9bxLE


2. The heritability of IQ *increases* from childhood to adulthood. Meanwhile, the effect of the shared environment largely fades away. In other words, when it comes to IQ, nature becomes more important as we get older, nurture less. https://t.co/UqtS1lpw3n


3. IQ scores have been increasing for the last century or so, a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. https://t.co/sCZvCst3hw (N ≈ 4 million)

(Note that the Flynn effect shows that IQ isn't 100% genetic; it doesn't show that it's 100% environmental.)


4. IQ predicts many important real world outcomes.

For example, though far from perfect, IQ is the single-best predictor of job performance we have – much better than Emotional Intelligence, the Big Five, Grit, etc. https://t.co/rKUgKDAAVx https://t.co/DWbVI8QSU3


5. Higher IQ is associated with a lower risk of death from most causes, including cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, most forms of cancer, homicide, suicide, and accident. https://t.co/PJjGNyeQRA (N = 728,160)
LIFE