1/ Robin Keller, until recently a retired equity partner at @HoganLovells who was still serving clients, writes for @WSJopinion about how the firm fired her for defending the #SCOTUS decision in Dobbs (which overruled Roe and Casey).
2/ For background, here's a July 2022 story by @Kathryn1 for @ATLblog about the controversial call where Robin Keller shared her views on Dobbs and abortion. Keller was suspended soon after.
4/ I've reached out to both Robin Keller & @HoganLovells for comment & additional information.
If I have more thoughts on this, I'll share them in a post on Original Jurisdiction (not here on Twitter). I'll add that post to this thread if & when I write it.
5/ HoLove: "As a firm we fully encourage our people to share their views on important issues that matter to them, but we expect our people to conduct themselves in accordance with firm policies. We value our differences, which make us stronger as a firm."
6/ Folks have criticized me for saying Robin Keller was fired for defending Dobbs when, in their view, she was fired for her "genocide" comparison.
I'm not going to die on the hill of defending Keller's specific comments; I don't need to.
7/ After Keller's WSJ op-ed was published, I heard from a different female Biglaw equity partner who WAS fired for plain-vanilla Dobbs support. Story at 11.
(Okay, not 11—more like sometime tomorrow—I'm still talking to this partner and writing it up.)
8/ In the meantime, here's a poll.
Should telling co-workers that you support the #SCOTUS decision in Dobbs be a firing offense in Biglaw?
9/ A Biglaw partner got fired for supporting—or, more precisely, for not opposing—the #SCOTUS decision in Dobbs.
Please READ my story before replying. It is NOT about Robin Keller of Hogan Lovells (but I discuss Robin's case too).👇
1/ I adapted my Original Jurisdiction story about Yale Law, Harvard Law, and other top law schools defecting from the U.S. News rankings for @Slate (with thanks to @rebeccaonion for the excellent editing).
2/ Given Slate's audience, which is broader and more diverse than Original Jurisdiction's audience of legal-industry insiders, this piece has less Yale Law School "inside baseball" (as fun as it might be), and more in the way of broader reflections.
3/ After 4 days, we're at 6 law schools out of @usnews:
The addition to the team of an experienced #SCOTUS advocate like Sopan Joshi is another sign of how seriously the DOJ is taking the Mar-a-Lago matter.👇
1/ Katherine Magbanua’s testimony this afternoon in her retrial for the murder of Dan Markel did not go well for her (especially compared to the first trial).
2/ At the first trial, I think the prosecution might have been surprised by Katie Magbanua’s decision to testify—understandably so, given all the evidence against her—and so the prosecution was caught a little flat-footed.
3/ This time around, the prosecution came prepared. Sarah Dugan did a very good job at cross-examining Katie Magbanua, whose demeanor was not as good this time compared to trial #1.
Why not send gun regulation back to the states—an approach that conservatives and federalists support for so many other issues (e.g., abortion)?
3/ Gun control is the quintessential issue where views will vary from state to state.
What business does it have being in the U.S. Constitution? Why shouldn't states be able to reflect the views of their citizens, free from federal constitutional constraint?
2/ Yes, it's a huge breach of #SCOTUS confidentiality, unlike anything I've seen in my 25 years of following and writing about the Court. (And it's a huge scoop for @alexbward and @joshgerstein of @Politico; whoever leaked to them put a lot on the line.)
3/ Please note: my post is about the leak itself, not the substance of the opinion or underlying issue of abortion.
For a reader's guide to the opinion, here's one by @EdWhelanEPPC, with page references to different sections: