{"id":133699,"date":"2025-09-22T17:03:32","date_gmt":"2025-09-23T01:03:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/09\/22\/legal-ethics-roundup-judicial-threats-da-willis-out-over-romance-tn-joins-accreditor-scrutiny-new-ai-bluebook-rule-more\/"},"modified":"2025-09-22T17:03:32","modified_gmt":"2025-09-23T01:03:32","slug":"legal-ethics-roundup-judicial-threats-da-willis-out-over-romance-tn-joins-accreditor-scrutiny-new-ai-bluebook-rule-more","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/09\/22\/legal-ethics-roundup-judicial-threats-da-willis-out-over-romance-tn-joins-accreditor-scrutiny-new-ai-bluebook-rule-more\/","title":{"rendered":"Legal Ethics Roundup: Judicial Threats, DA Willis Out Over Romance, TN Joins Accreditor Scrutiny, New AI Bluebook Rule & More"},"content":{"rendered":"

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup,\u00a0<\/strong>here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Happy Monday!<\/p>\n

Hello from California (again)! As I write you, I\u2019m heading back from my\u00a0week of leadership conferences<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0where I managed to also catch some football in LA (even if it was a\u00a0rough night<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0for Sparty).<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Sunset on Half Moon Bay (photo by Renee Jefferson)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

After\u00a0announcing the publication<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0of my new article\u00a0Ethics Accountability: The Next Era for Lawyers and Judges<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0last week I have another to share\u00a0hot off the press<\/strong>\ud83d\udd25, this one co-authored with\u00a0Hannah Johnson<\/strong>\u00a0(Southern Illinois) and published in the U.C. Davis Law Review. You can download\u00a0Dirty Laundry:<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0A Book Review of\u00a0<\/strong>Supreme Bias: Gender and Race in U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0by Christina L. Boyd, Paul M. Collins, Jr., and Lori A. Ringhand<\/strong>\u00a0(Stanford University Press)<\/strong>\u00a0for free at this\u00a0link<\/a><\/strong>. Here\u2019s a teaser.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n

I recently talked with\u00a0Bloomberg Law<\/strong>\u00a0reporter\u00a0Ben Miller\u00a0<\/strong>about the limits of bar discipline proceedings and you can read more about that conversation below at Headline #1. Speaking of headlines, let\u2019s dive right in. Be sure to scroll to the end for a bonus headline \u2013 some special news about innovation and access to legal services from our friends down under. \ud83c\udde6\ud83c\uddfa<\/p>\n

\n

Highlights from Last Week\u00a0\u2013 Top Ten Headlines<\/h3>\n

#1\u00a0\u201cBar Complaints Offer \u2018Imperfect Tool\u2019 to Challenge Trump\u2019s DOJ.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Bloomberg Law:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cJustice Department lawyers\u2014including political appointees and career staff\u2014are facing bar complaints over their work defending the Trump administration, but complainants alleging ethical violations shouldn\u2019t expect swift resolution. \u2026 \u2018The disciplinary process is at times an imperfect tool for addressing actions by lawyers that run afoul of our ethical obligations,\u2019 said\u00a0Renee Knake Jefferson<\/strong>, a professor of legal ethics at the University of Houston Law Center. But the message that lawyers send to the public and their professional community by calling out perceived misconduct at the DOJ sets a critical standard, law professors and advocates said.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#2 \u201cGOP Bill Seeks to Eliminate District Commission that Nominates DC Court Judges.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0ABC News:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cLegislation that would eliminate the District of Columbia\u2019s Judicial Nomination Commission (JNC) is among the 14 D.C.-related bills up for consideration by Congress. Currently, the JNC is responsible for selecting nominees to fill judicial vacancies in D.C.\u2019s local courts: the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals. The seven-member commission includes appointments by the president, the mayor, the D.C. Council, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court, and the D.C. Bar. After the commission recommends candidates, the president makes appointments with Senate confirmation. The proposed bill would scrap this commission entirely.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#3<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cAmerica\u2019s Judges are Under Attack \u2013 Lawyers Have a Duty to Defend Them.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Kellye Testy\u00a0<\/strong>(AALS) and\u00a0Austen Parrish\u00a0<\/strong>(UC Irvine) in\u00a0The Hill:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cAmerican judges are under attack. Approximately\u00a0one-third of the federal judiciary<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0have received threats over the last year, and the\u00a0U.S. Marshals Service<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0reports more than 500 threats\u00a0<\/a>were made against federal judges over the past 11 months, with a noticeable spike in recent months. The sheer number of threats, including to judges\u2019 families, are unprecedented.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#4 \u201cNew Study Confirms Your Associates Are Already Using ChatGPT. Here\u2019s What To Do.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0JD Supra:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cNew research from the\u00a0National Bureau of Economic Research<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0reveals that 700 million people use ChatGPT weekly, and the demographics should terrify any managing partner still clinging to committee-approved AI pilots. Nearly half of all adult ChatGPT messages come from users under 26. Your incoming associate class doesn\u2019t just know about AI; they\u2019ve been using it daily since law school. \u2026 Here\u2019s the uncomfortable truth: while your AI committee debates whether to approve a six-figure contract with a legal AI vendor, your associates are copying confidential client information into ChatGPT.. They\u2019re not doing it maliciously. They\u2019re doing it because the tool works, it\u2019s free, and your firm\u2019s official technology stack feels like using a typewriter in the iPhone era.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#5<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cNew Bluebook Rule On Citing to AI Generates Criticism from Legal Scholars and Practitioners.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0LawSites:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cHas there ever been a time since the advent of legal reporting systems when citations have been under greater attack? Driven by their unwitting reliance on AI to generate legal briefs, lawyers seem to have forgotten everything they ever learned in law school about how to research and cite the law. Standing as a bulwark against this attack, one would think, is\u00a0The Bluebook<\/a><\/strong><\/em>, the uniform system of citation that is among the first things taught to a first-year law student, and to which virtually all lawyers are expected to abide, except where excused by local rules of court. Yet now that very bulwark is itself under attack, thanks to the release last May of its 22nd edition, which introduced Rule 18.3,\u00a0The Bluebook\u2019s<\/em>\u00a0first standardized format for citing to generative artificial intelligence content. While the addition of AI citation guidance would seem to reflect\u00a0The Bluebook\u2019s<\/em>\u00a0expected role of evolving to address new types and formats of sources, the new rule has sparked criticism from legal scholars and practitioners who argue it is fundamentally flawed in both conception and execution.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#6<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cFani Willis Must Remain off Trump Case after Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Her Appeal.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0USA Today:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cThe Supreme Court of Georgia is leaving in place an appeals court decision that disqualified\u00a0Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis<\/strong>\u00a0from prosecuting\u00a0President Donald Trump<\/strong>\u00a0because of her romantic relationship with a special prosecutor on the case. \u2026 Four Georgia Supreme Court justices came together to form a majority in the decision to turn down the appeal. Three justices dissented. One further justice didn\u2019t participate in the decision, and one justice was disqualified.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#7<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cTraining Better Lawyers.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Daniel Theis\u00a0<\/strong>in the\u00a0Washington Post:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cAttacks on the Council of the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar,\u00a0the only national accreditor of law schools<\/a><\/strong>, ignore the value of the council\u2019s work on behalf of students and the practice of law. The council accredits\u00a0a wide range<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0of law schools. The consistent quality of accredited schools equips graduates to serve their clients and the public. In 2024, the\u00a0overall bar exam passage<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0rate for graduates of accredited law schools was 44 percentage points higher than for nonaccredited schools. \u2026 Finally, our work is separate and independent from the general ABA and is nonpartisan. Whatever one thinks of the politics of the ABA, it is not involved in council enforcement actions, does not choose council personnel and cannot dictate the content of any standard. Lawyers perform vital work for their clients, and accrediting the schools that train these lawyers comes with a profound responsibility. The council has met this responsibility for more than a century.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. [Full disclosure:<\/strong>\u00a0I am an elected member of the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, and Daniel Theis is the Chair of the Council.]<\/p>\n

#8<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cTennessee Joins States Eying End to ABA\u2019s Role in Law School Accreditation.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Reuters:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cTennessee is considering whether to stop relying on the American Bar Association to accredit law schools in the state, joining Florida, Texas and Ohio in reconsidering the organization\u2019s primary role in U.S. legal education. The Supreme Court of Tennessee on Tuesday\u00a0asked the public to weigh in<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0on a series of potential reforms to how the state licenses lawyers and regulates law firms.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#9<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cFormer US Judges Defend Judicial Independence as Threats Rise.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Bloomberg Law:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cFormer federal judges are taking advantage of Constitution Day to speak out against threats against sitting judges. A\u00a0letter signed by 42 former judges<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0and published Wednesday on the anniversary of the document\u2019s signing in 1787 says as judges they took oaths to \u2018support and defend the Constitution.\u2019 The signatories were appointed by presidents of both parties, including\u00a0Ronald Reagan<\/strong>,\u00a0Bill Clinton<\/strong>, and\u00a0George W. Bush<\/strong>, and are members of the group Keep Our Republic\u2019s Article III Coalition. The former judges said while sitting judges are limited in being able to speak publicly, they \u2018are no longer so constrained.\u2019 Federal judges have come under attack by\u00a0Trump<\/strong>\u00a0and his allies for rulings that block the administration\u2019s policies. That dynamic has also combined with increased threats against federal judges in recent years.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#10 \u201cInsurance for In-House Counsel: Understanding \u2018Employed Lawyer\u2019 Policies.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0JD Supra:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cDo in-house lawyers need their own malpractice insurance? Some might. If needed, the type of insurance in-house counsel should explore is called employed lawyers professional liability (ELPL) insurance.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Bonus Headline!\u00a0<\/strong>\ud83c\udde6\ud83c\uddfa<\/p>\n

#11<\/strong>\u00a0News from Down Under \u2013 RMIT and Anika Legal Launch New Partnership to Provide Legal Help to Those in Need.\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Noel Lim\u00a0<\/strong>(Anika Legal) on\u00a0LinkedIn:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cLast night two historic things were launched: the RMIT Law School [partnership], and the RMIT x\u00a0Anika Legal<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0Virtual Student Clinic. When we started Anika back in 2018, I knew partnerships with law schools would be critical. What I didn\u2019t know was how tough it would be \u2013 doors closed, ideas dismissed, and even a meeting that brought a co-founder to tears. That\u2019s why this milestone means so much. Thank you to RMIT University for believing in Anika\u2019s vision \u2013 backing innovation, social justice, and students. Together, we\u2019ve built a clinic that helps hundreds of renters stay in safe homes each year, while giving law students the chance to change lives from day one of their careers. \u2026 And to make this partnership even stronger Anika is moving our office onto the RMIT campus!.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. [Side note:<\/strong>\u00a0Noel was one of the first people I met with when conducting research on law and innovation as part of my work as the\u00a0Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Entrepreneurship and Innovation<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0where I was hosted by Australia\u2019s RMIT University Law School in 2019. So I am thrilled to see this partnership! Congrats to Anika Legal and RMIT Law!]<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia (photo by Renee Jefferson)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Get Hired<\/h3>\n

Did you miss the 350+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Upcoming Ethics Events & Other Announcements<\/h3>\n

Did you miss an announcement from previous weeks? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Keep in Touch<\/h3>\n

News tips? Announcements? Events?<\/strong>\u00a0A job to post?<\/strong>\u00a0Reading recommendations?<\/strong>\u00a0Email\u00a0legalethics@substack.com\u00a0\u2013 but be sure to subscribe first, otherwise the email won\u2019t be delivered.<\/p>\n

\n

Renee Knake Jefferson holds the endowed Doherty Chair in Legal Ethics and is a Professor of Law at the University of Houston. Check out more of her writing at the\u00a0Legal Ethics Roundup<\/a>. Find her on X (formerly Twitter) at\u00a0@reneeknake<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky at\u00a0legalethics.bsky.social<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The post Legal Ethics Roundup: Judicial Threats, DA Willis Out Over Romance, TN Joins Accreditor Scrutiny, New AI Bluebook Rule & More<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n

Ed. note<\/u>: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup,here<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Happy Monday!<\/p>\n

Hello from California (again)! As I write you, I\u2019m heading back from my\u00a0week of leadership conferences<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0where I managed to also catch some football in LA (even if it was a\u00a0rough night<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0for Sparty).<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Sunset on Half Moon Bay (photo by Renee Jefferson)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

After\u00a0announcing the publication<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0of my new article\u00a0Ethics Accountability: The Next Era for Lawyers and Judges<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0last week I have another to share\u00a0hot off the press<\/strong>\uf525, this one co-authored with\u00a0Hannah Johnson<\/strong>\u00a0(Southern Illinois) and published in the U.C. Davis Law Review. You can download\u00a0Dirty Laundry:<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0A Book Review of\u00a0<\/strong>Supreme Bias: Gender and Race in U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0by Christina L. Boyd, Paul M. Collins, Jr., and Lori A. Ringhand<\/strong>\u00a0(Stanford University Press)<\/strong>\u00a0for free at this\u00a0link<\/a><\/strong>. Here\u2019s a teaser.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n

I recently talked with\u00a0Bloomberg Law<\/strong>\u00a0reporter\u00a0Ben Miller\u00a0<\/strong>about the limits of bar discipline proceedings and you can read more about that conversation below at Headline #1. Speaking of headlines, let\u2019s dive right in. Be sure to scroll to the end for a bonus headline \u2013 some special news about innovation and access to legal services from our friends down under. \uf1e6\uf1fa<\/p>\n

\n

#1\u00a0\u201cBar Complaints Offer \u2018Imperfect Tool\u2019 to Challenge Trump\u2019s DOJ.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Bloomberg Law:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cJustice Department lawyers\u2014including political appointees and career staff\u2014are facing bar complaints over their work defending the Trump administration, but complainants alleging ethical violations shouldn\u2019t expect swift resolution. \u2026 \u2018The disciplinary process is at times an imperfect tool for addressing actions by lawyers that run afoul of our ethical obligations,\u2019 said\u00a0Renee Knake Jefferson<\/strong>, a professor of legal ethics at the University of Houston Law Center. But the message that lawyers send to the public and their professional community by calling out perceived misconduct at the DOJ sets a critical standard, law professors and advocates said.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#2 \u201cGOP Bill Seeks to Eliminate District Commission that Nominates DC Court Judges.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0ABC News:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cLegislation that would eliminate the District of Columbia\u2019s Judicial Nomination Commission (JNC) is among the 14 D.C.-related bills up for consideration by Congress. Currently, the JNC is responsible for selecting nominees to fill judicial vacancies in D.C.\u2019s local courts: the Superior Court and the Court of Appeals. The seven-member commission includes appointments by the president, the mayor, the D.C. Council, the chief judge of the U.S. District Court, and the D.C. Bar. After the commission recommends candidates, the president makes appointments with Senate confirmation. The proposed bill would scrap this commission entirely.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#3<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cAmerica\u2019s Judges are Under Attack \u2013 Lawyers Have a Duty to Defend Them.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Kellye Testy\u00a0<\/strong>(AALS) and\u00a0Austen Parrish\u00a0<\/strong>(UC Irvine) in\u00a0The Hill:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cAmerican judges are under attack. Approximately\u00a0one-third of the federal judiciary<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0have received threats over the last year, and the\u00a0U.S. Marshals Service<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0reports more than 500 threatswere made against federal judges over the past 11 months, with a noticeable spike in recent months. The sheer number of threats, including to judges\u2019 families, are unprecedented.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#4 \u201cNew Study Confirms Your Associates Are Already Using ChatGPT. Here\u2019s What To Do.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0JD Supra:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cNew research from the\u00a0National Bureau of Economic Research<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0reveals that 700 million people use ChatGPT weekly, and the demographics should terrify any managing partner still clinging to committee-approved AI pilots. Nearly half of all adult ChatGPT messages come from users under 26. Your incoming associate class doesn\u2019t just know about AI; they\u2019ve been using it daily since law school. \u2026 Here\u2019s the uncomfortable truth: while your AI committee debates whether to approve a six-figure contract with a legal AI vendor, your associates are copying confidential client information into ChatGPT.. They\u2019re not doing it maliciously. They\u2019re doing it because the tool works, it\u2019s free, and your firm\u2019s official technology stack feels like using a typewriter in the iPhone era.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#5<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cNew Bluebook Rule On Citing to AI Generates Criticism from Legal Scholars and Practitioners.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0LawSites:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cHas there ever been a time since the advent of legal reporting systems when citations have been under greater attack? Driven by their unwitting reliance on AI to generate legal briefs, lawyers seem to have forgotten everything they ever learned in law school about how to research and cite the law. Standing as a bulwark against this attack, one would think, is\u00a0The Bluebook<\/a><\/strong><\/em>, the uniform system of citation that is among the first things taught to a first-year law student, and to which virtually all lawyers are expected to abide, except where excused by local rules of court. Yet now that very bulwark is itself under attack, thanks to the release last May of its 22nd edition, which introduced Rule 18.3,\u00a0The Bluebook\u2019s<\/em>\u00a0first standardized format for citing to generative artificial intelligence content. While the addition of AI citation guidance would seem to reflect\u00a0The Bluebook\u2019s<\/em>\u00a0expected role of evolving to address new types and formats of sources, the new rule has sparked criticism from legal scholars and practitioners who argue it is fundamentally flawed in both conception and execution.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#6<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cFani Willis Must Remain off Trump Case after Georgia Supreme Court Rejects Her Appeal.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0USA Today:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cThe Supreme Court of Georgia is leaving in place an appeals court decision that disqualified\u00a0Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis<\/strong>\u00a0from prosecuting\u00a0President Donald Trump<\/strong>\u00a0because of her romantic relationship with a special prosecutor on the case. \u2026 Four Georgia Supreme Court justices came together to form a majority in the decision to turn down the appeal. Three justices dissented. One further justice didn\u2019t participate in the decision, and one justice was disqualified.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#7<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cTraining Better Lawyers.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Daniel Theis\u00a0<\/strong>in the\u00a0Washington Post:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cAttacks on the Council of the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar,\u00a0the only national accreditor of law schools<\/a><\/strong>, ignore the value of the council\u2019s work on behalf of students and the practice of law. The council accredits\u00a0a wide range<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0of law schools. The consistent quality of accredited schools equips graduates to serve their clients and the public. In 2024, the\u00a0overall bar exam passage<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0rate for graduates of accredited law schools was 44 percentage points higher than for nonaccredited schools. \u2026 Finally, our work is separate and independent from the general ABA and is nonpartisan. Whatever one thinks of the politics of the ABA, it is not involved in council enforcement actions, does not choose council personnel and cannot dictate the content of any standard. Lawyers perform vital work for their clients, and accrediting the schools that train these lawyers comes with a profound responsibility. The council has met this responsibility for more than a century.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. [Full disclosure:<\/strong>\u00a0I am an elected member of the Council of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admission to the Bar, and Daniel Theis is the Chair of the Council.]<\/p>\n

#8<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cTennessee Joins States Eying End to ABA\u2019s Role in Law School Accreditation.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Reuters:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cTennessee is considering whether to stop relying on the American Bar Association to accredit law schools in the state, joining Florida, Texas and Ohio in reconsidering the organization\u2019s primary role in U.S. legal education. The Supreme Court of Tennessee on Tuesday\u00a0asked the public to weigh in<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0on a series of potential reforms to how the state licenses lawyers and regulates law firms.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#9<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cFormer US Judges Defend Judicial Independence as Threats Rise.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Bloomberg Law:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cFormer federal judges are taking advantage of Constitution Day to speak out against threats against sitting judges. A\u00a0letter signed by 42 former judges<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0and published Wednesday on the anniversary of the document\u2019s signing in 1787 says as judges they took oaths to \u2018support and defend the Constitution.\u2019 The signatories were appointed by presidents of both parties, including\u00a0Ronald Reagan<\/strong>,\u00a0Bill Clinton<\/strong>, and\u00a0George W. Bush<\/strong>, and are members of the group Keep Our Republic\u2019s Article III Coalition. The former judges said while sitting judges are limited in being able to speak publicly, they \u2018are no longer so constrained.\u2019 Federal judges have come under attack by\u00a0Trump<\/strong>\u00a0and his allies for rulings that block the administration\u2019s policies. That dynamic has also combined with increased threats against federal judges in recent years.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

#10 \u201cInsurance for In-House Counsel: Understanding \u2018Employed Lawyer\u2019 Policies.\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0JD Supra:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cDo in-house lawyers need their own malpractice insurance? Some might. If needed, the type of insurance in-house counsel should explore is called employed lawyers professional liability (ELPL) insurance.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Bonus Headline!\u00a0<\/strong>\uf1e6\uf1fa<\/p>\n

#11<\/strong>\u00a0News from Down Under \u2013 RMIT and Anika Legal Launch New Partnership to Provide Legal Help to Those in Need.\u00a0<\/strong>From\u00a0Noel Lim\u00a0<\/strong>(Anika Legal) on\u00a0LinkedIn:\u00a0<\/strong>\u201cLast night two historic things were launched: the RMIT Law School [partnership], and the RMIT x\u00a0Anika Legal<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0Virtual Student Clinic. When we started Anika back in 2018, I knew partnerships with law schools would be critical. What I didn\u2019t know was how tough it would be \u2013 doors closed, ideas dismissed, and even a meeting that brought a co-founder to tears. That\u2019s why this milestone means so much. Thank you to RMIT University for believing in Anika\u2019s vision \u2013 backing innovation, social justice, and students. Together, we\u2019ve built a clinic that helps hundreds of renters stay in safe homes each year, while giving law students the chance to change lives from day one of their careers. \u2026 And to make this partnership even stronger Anika is moving our office onto the RMIT campus!.\u201d Read more\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>. [Side note:<\/strong>\u00a0Noel was one of the first people I met with when conducting research on law and innovation as part of my work as the\u00a0Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Entrepreneurship and Innovation<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0where I was hosted by Australia\u2019s RMIT University Law School in 2019. So I am thrilled to see this partnership! Congrats to Anika Legal and RMIT Law!]<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia (photo by Renee Jefferson)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Did you miss the 350+ job postings from previous weeks? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

Did you miss an announcement from previous weeks? Find them all\u00a0here<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

\n

News tips? Announcements? Events?<\/strong>\u00a0A job to post?<\/strong>\u00a0Reading recommendations?<\/strong>\u00a0Email\u00a0[email\u00a0protected]<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 but be sure to subscribe first, otherwise the email won\u2019t be delivered.<\/p>\n

\n

Renee Knake Jefferson holds the endowed Doherty Chair in Legal Ethics and is a Professor of Law at the University of Houston. Check out more of her writing at the\u00a0Legal Ethics Roundup<\/a>. Find her on X (formerly Twitter) at\u00a0@reneeknake<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky at\u00a0legalethics.bsky.social<\/a>.\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ed. note: Please welcome Renee Knake Jefferson back to the pages of Above the Law. Subscribe to her Substack, Legal Ethics Roundup,\u00a0here. Happy Monday! Hello from California (again)! As I write you, I\u2019m heading back from my\u00a0week of leadership conferences\u00a0where I managed to also catch some football in LA (even if it was a\u00a0rough night\u00a0for […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":133700,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-133699","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/https3A2F2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com2Fpublic2Fimages2Fd4e2ca8b-e098-4c50-92e4-7ecdfbcd3780_3024x4032-HEfeRC.jpg?fit=1456%2C1941&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133699","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=133699"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133699\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/133700"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133699"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133699"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133699"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}