Expert Analysis

• A Core Weakness In The Challenge To Birthright Citizenship

  

  The government’s recent oral arguments against birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara would have the Supreme Court use modern immigration classifications as markers for a constitutional boundary that is not expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment, making the theory easier to administer but weaker as a matter of text and history, says attorney Tara Kennedy.

• Suit's Dismissal Would Not Settle Gold Card Visa's Legality

  

  The government’s recent assertion that the plaintiffs in American Association of University Professors v. Department of Homeland Security lack standing to challenge the Trump administration’s pay-to-play immigration program does not address whether an agency can deem a million-dollar gift evidence of eligibility for immigration benefits carefully defined by Congress, says Jun Li at Reid & Wise.

• 2 AI Snafus Show Why Attys Can't Outsource Judgment

  

  The recent incident involving Sullivan & Cromwell where citations in a filed motion were fabricated by artificial intelligence, as well as a punitive ruling from the Sixth Circuit in U.S. v. Farris, demonstrate that the obligation to supervise AI has belonged and always will belong to lawyers, says John Powell at the Kentucky School Boards Association.

• Series

  Playing Magic: The Gathering Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  The competitive card game Magic: The Gathering offers me a training ground for the strategic thinking skills crucial to litigation, challenging me to adapt to oft-updated rules, analyze text as complicated as any statute and anticipate my opponent’s next moves, says Christopher Smith at Lash Goldberg.

• What's At Stake For Employers In Fight Over Visa Pause

  

  For employers that rely on foreign talent, the Trump administration’s suspension of immigrant visa issuance for the nationals of 75 countries is creating practical problems, and a recently filed lawsuit challenging the pause could determine whether consular processing, for some, ceases to be an individualized process, says attorney Lisa Eisenberg.

• Improving Well-Being In Law, 10 Years After Landmark Study

  

  An important 2016 study revealed significant substance abuse and mental health issues among lawyers, and while the findings helped normalize the conversation around these topics, a decade later, structural change is still needed, says Denise Robinson at PLI.

• Building A Persecution Case After Justices' Asylum Ruling

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Urias-Orellana v. Bondi raises the bar for overturning agency findings in federal court, changing how practitioners handling asylum and removal defense cases need to think about building a factual record and formulating arguments on appeal, say attorneys at Lai & Turner and Farzaneh Law.

• Series

  Officiating Football Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Though they may seem to have little in common, officiating football has sharpened many of the same skills that define effective lawyering in management-side labor and employment: preparation, judgment, composure, credibility and ability to make difficult decisions in real time, says Josh Nadreau at Fisher Phillips.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: How To Draft Pleadings

  

  Most law school graduates step into their first jobs without ever having drafted a complaint, answer, motion or other type of pleading, but that gap can be closed by understanding the strategy embedded in every filing, writing with clarity and purpose, and seeking feedback at every step, says Eric Yakaitis at Haug Barron.

• E-Discovery Quarterly: Recent Rulings On ESI Control

  

  Several recent federal court decisions have perpetuated a split over what constitutes “control” of electronically stored information — with judges divided on whether the standard should turn on a party's legal right or practical ability to obtain the information, say attorneys at Sidley.

• 2 Discovery Rulings Break With Heppner On AI Privilege Issue

  

  While a New York federal court’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner suggests that some litigants’ communications with AI tools are discoverable, two other recent federal court decisions demonstrate that such interactions generally qualify for work-product protection under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, says Joshua Dunn at Brown Rudnick.

• Series

  Isshin-Ryu Karate Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My involvement in martial arts, specifically Isshin-ryu, which has principles rooted in the eight codes of karate, has been one of the most foundational in the development of my personality, and particularly my approach to challenges — including in my practice of law, says Kaitlyn Stone at Barnes & Thornburg.

• Opinion

  State Bars Need To Get Specific About AI Confidentiality

  

  Lawyers need to put actual client information into artificial intelligence tools to get their full value, but they cannot confidently do so until state bars offer clear, formal authority on which plan tiers of the three most popular generative AI tools are safe to use when sharing specific client details, says attorney Nick Berk.

• Opinion

  Judicial Restraint Anchors Constitutional Order

  

  Contrasting opinions in two recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings — Trump v. CASA and Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections — demonstrate how the judiciary’s constitutionally entrusted role can easily be preserved or disrupted, and invite renewed attention to the enduring importance of judicial restraint, says Ninth Circuit Judge J. Clifford Wallace.

• Series

  Alpine Skiing Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Skiing has shaped habits I rely on daily as an attorney — focus, resilience and the ability to remain steady when circumstances shift rapidly — and influences the way I approach legal strategy, client counseling and teamwork, says Isaku Begert at Marshall Gerstein.