A law firm in America fired an equity partner for having “problematic views” on abortion by agreeing with a Supreme Court decision. It’s over. We’re living in Idiocracy.
Well thats whats happening in lawyerland. The globohomos are willing to spend billions if not trillions on lawyers to push their agendas. What are the conservatives offering up? A pat on the back and no support when the loonies and feds come after them?
Right, that's what I was thinking. What good is it to work for a firm that thinks the Supreme Court doesn't know the Constitution? She is better off starting her own practice.
The organization Harmeet founded, something like Republican Lawyers Association, is one of the few that actually seems to fight for conservative causes. Be wary of anyone that touts membership in the Federalist Society, though. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say be wary of anyone the Federalist Society pushes to the fore.
To my knowledge, they are solid. But they aren't a political per se organization, I believe they are very focused on Religious liberty and fighting abortion. They aren't the kind of organization that would be fighting fraudulent elections or promoting lists of DAs and Judges.
It's the Right Wing trap..... To do other wise is to violate the standard that you are fighting for. It's why the right wing always ends up swimming in circles, just in time to be flushed down the drain.
Not when they are targeted by local lefty state bars set up to protect big firms aka Jewish conglomerate firms.
Ask yourself, if a conservative filed the sort of frivolous lawsuits that Marc Elias files, or had an FBI portal in their office, what would happen to them?
The federalist society cancer has created a conservative lawyer class that only defends corporate hegemony and guts due process rights. It took 50 years of grassroots activism to get the blatantly erroneous Roe decision overturned and they cower under their beds in the face of Obgerfell. A state AG would get swept into office on a platform of executing pedophiles, but the Federalist society would say they were unfit for the position.
Conservatives gave a quarter of a billion to the RNC election lawyer fund after 2020 … Then Ronna McDaniel sat her fat ass on the money and didn’t hire a single attorney or file a single case.
While brain damaged, this was a bunch of progressives having a temper tantrum about a case that wasn't even theirs. IMHO this one is an even bigger deal... the lawyers that won the recent Bruen 2A supreme court case were asked to resign by their firm for having the nerve to score a conservative victory. One of the biggest firms out there, and the lawyers themselves aren't small names either. https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/gun-bill-lawyers-leaving-firm-after-scotus-ruling/
The problem with this oversimplistic view is that there are so many things that are considered "not speech" that might be speech and some things that are considered speech that might not be speech. The Supreme Court has ruled on many of these things and you are likely to disagree with at least a few on both sides.
Free speech is not absolute – US law does recognize a number of restrictions to free speech. These include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, harassment, incitement to illegal conduct and imminent lawless action, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising, copyright or patent rights.
It's too easy to homogenize a group of womens opinions and direction. Thats why shit like this is so easy to believe happens. Women cannot control their desire for social acceptance and will do anything to not be this fired and ridiculed woman. She should sue
Sadly, many men are just as catty these days. I guess the main difference is that most men don't try to change the "culture" of their workplace where too many women live for it.
Nah, a lot of guys are up in arms (up in soy?) about Dobbs. It’s pretty nuts. Like they took all the chivalry they can’t show to women because of equity and put it into anger about Dobbs.
She's right. Even some of the better educated democrats I know and/or follow admit that Roe was a bad case in many ways.
That's the problem with liberalism. Rather than change the law they simply rationalize it away as moot 'cuz they say so. Lots of people were sent to jail for marijuana before it was legalized in many states, and many are being forgiven. If they truly believe abortion is a right they'd accept some losses until the law is changed. Nope, gotta have that magical shield of ignoring what they disagree with to go with their emotional support animal.
And they made a point to produce fewer well educated liberals going forward. I never meet any younger ones, lawyers included, who know or care about facts that contradict their goals...
What's at stake is nothing short of Washington's projected system of total social control of the American people. It desires the power to enact one rule that applies to all people, across State lines as if they didn't exist. Part of the strategy involves psychological tyranny as we now see in the movement for trans sexual children.
The politicians have no interest in going there. If they are not a part of it already, they have been told, "go along, get along, or get out of here." The media is completely co-opted. Imagine the haul they took in over the mid-terms? They were throwing million dollar budgets around like it was chump change. Fortunately, we have internet journalists to teach us. Once they have been eliminated, we'll have nothing.
We aren't going to vote our way out. We aren't going to peacefully protest our way out with large upbeat Trump rallies.
When these people learn that actions such as this will result in being dragged out of bed in the middle of the night by angry men with guns, to be never seen again, then we will see this culture become far less trendy among the woke white women currently destroying our country.
my favorite part is the 'above the law' article that repeatedly singles her out as being white as if that has any relevance beyond trying to normalize their hateful leftist framing.
Late 60s. Harvard Undergrad Class of 1975, then law school.
She was head of Hogan Lovell's Bankruptcy and Restructuring practice until a couple years ago (many firms make or encourage older Partners to wind down, transition some business, and/or go part time near the tail of their careers and/or mandatory de-partnerize them at about age 70).
Other woke large AMLAW 100 class firms have fired Partners and expressed how they made people in the fitm, say "fear for their lives" for far less.
Not really. Major law firm's normally don't mind older partners hanging around several years with Of Counsel or even Partner titles (re: Partner titles assuming that the firm, like most, bases Partner comp on a metric re: work they personally did/collected on in a year, work they are listed as being Matter Manager for re: other people's work, work they originated - - vs some Partnerships that mostly pay "Lockstep" and all Partners get more or less the same comp).
The idea is older Partners and ex-partners (as noted above, often called Of Counsel or similar titles) are a resource for the younger folk as to arcane rules and regs, often good as supervisors, still have good client contacts (and often retain a solid book of business) and it can take some years to transition "their" clients to other lawyers at the firm (so when the Partner really retires, the old Partner's clients stay with the firm).
Firms don't really make people retire (and even then, they normally are exceptions for people with power and/or good client connections) until 70 or later. The idea with that is, in part, to allow younger Partners to "get" the clients of the older ones (who may have technically "landed" them for the firm decades ago and sometimes do not still deal with some of them personally on a super frequent basis - client "origination" and "client management" credit is normally somewhat horded and forms a fair amount of a Partner's pay and power with in a firm) with a smooth transition. And to avoid certain mistakes or lack or responsiveness than can happen with lawyers that, well, get like Biden.
But, when the Partner in question was head of Hogan Lovell's Restructuring Practice, she would have likely had the "Juice" with the firm's Executive Committee/Managing Partner Committee (or whatever Hogan may call it) to stay (or at least negotiate a better exit). But as the Partner was at least 2 years into wind down mode, her Juice and practical lock on her exiting "portable originations" that would likely leave with her if she left was probably reduced. Plus in her practice of Restructuring (Bankruptcy), there are less repeat customers than say Litigation or Corporate, and thus any fear of the Partner "taking her book of business" was likely reduced.
Bottom line: always consider transitioning away from firms that go Woke or more Woke - due to a merger or otherwise (unless you are Woke); your likely "portable" book of business and origination is usually key re: leverage for almost anything; and generally consider keep your head down a tad (especially on anything that is "all firm" or "all Partners" and not a smaller group or departmental thing) if you are the odd man out unless you have sufficient juice or are actively working on transitioning to a new firm or retiring or something is a hill you are willing to "die on" (say never giving the mother fuckers a Vax Card, or actively working to expose D election fraud). If you keep things smaller group or it is a hill you are willing to die on, especially if you are not handcuffed by super needing your full salary/draw to keep up your lifestyle, then most Partners have a lot more latitude.
Also, FYI, if someone is willing to transition to (and can fully function in their practice area) in a mid-size firm (say 300 or fewer lawyers) vs "Biglaw" and can be a bit picky, most of the day to day Woke can go away. Also select Biglaw firms are less woke than others, but say having large offices in more based states like FL or TX is not controlling (for things such as adopting an "effective" Vax mandate).
A system Karl Marx himself would envy. Create the opressed/opressor divisions, women and blacks the perfect example. At that point, "We hold the power to solve all nof your problems. We will make you doctors, lawyers, congressmen, and presidents." Never realizing how they have been used, or, caring less if they do recognize it, the target becomes eternally grateful to those who enabled them. Oh, yeah, let's never forget the invisible enemy -- whitey and his culture.
There’s some of us maga lawyers around. But I don’t work for a firm. I wouldn’t last in that sort of woke culture. Solo work is more rewarding in my opinion although it comes with its own list of issues and pitfalls.
My partner and I resigned from our respective big firms in 2012 to start a small boutique practice. The most important factor in job satisfaction is who you work with, not how much money you make or even what you do. It's about people and integrity.
I'm in super low-level muni court stuff. I just grind out the quick flat fees & new clients every day.
99% of my work is helping Mom & Pop style landlords.
It's wild talking with other lawyers who have such a different life than I do. Briefs, motions, depositions.... lol.
A "deposition" in my world is a brief conversation in the court hallway before our case is called in front of a magistrate who will "recommend" judgment in one way or the other.
Honestly, I consider myself more of a businessman than a lawyer at this point in my life.
It's fun and rewarding but sometimes I miss the stability of the W2.
After the Supreme Court issued its Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade in June, global law firm Hogan Lovells organized an online conference call for……
Sounds like the Papa John's call to set up John. It's pretty incredible when you can just take away someone's job, team, company or brand for saying true facts
Just a typical corporate "we'd like to hear your opinions and start a discussion, but your opinions and discussions all better agree with the company's position" meeting. Leftist-occupied companies do this shit all the time specifically to weed out and identify "problematic wrong-thinkers". It's quite literally a trap.
A law firm in America fired an equity partner for having “problematic views” on abortion by agreeing with a Supreme Court decision. It’s over. We’re living in Idiocracy.
we should totally hang out
Well thats whats happening in lawyerland. The globohomos are willing to spend billions if not trillions on lawyers to push their agendas. What are the conservatives offering up? A pat on the back and no support when the loonies and feds come after them?
phase one: media phase two: activist judges/organizations phase three: profit
phase three: genocide
FIFY
You ville eat ze bugs and own natzing and juice ville be happy.
If ze juice ville be happy, zen vee are doingz eet wrong!
Phase 0 before this: require lawyers to be "educated" before being allowed to practice law.
Then control the education/indoctrination.
This. The bar is an ideological gatekeeping device.
So are a large number of "professional" organizations.
Laws should be written in plain language that a barely literate moron could comprehend
Right, that's what I was thinking. What good is it to work for a firm that thinks the Supreme Court doesn't know the Constitution? She is better off starting her own practice.
"that thinks the Supreme Court doesn't know the Constitution"
TBF, for 50 years they didn't. The difference is, only the "tolerant" side fires people for having a different opinion.
The organization Harmeet founded, something like Republican Lawyers Association, is one of the few that actually seems to fight for conservative causes. Be wary of anyone that touts membership in the Federalist Society, though. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say be wary of anyone the Federalist Society pushes to the fore.
What about the Thomas More Society? Are they legit?
To my knowledge, they are solid. But they aren't a political per se organization, I believe they are very focused on Religious liberty and fighting abortion. They aren't the kind of organization that would be fighting fraudulent elections or promoting lists of DAs and Judges.
Is there a list of maga lawyers floating around somewhere?
No sense in supporting the wackadoodles.
It's the Right Wing trap..... To do other wise is to violate the standard that you are fighting for. It's why the right wing always ends up swimming in circles, just in time to be flushed down the drain.
Not when they are targeted by local lefty state bars set up to protect big firms aka Jewish conglomerate firms.
Ask yourself, if a conservative filed the sort of frivolous lawsuits that Marc Elias files, or had an FBI portal in their office, what would happen to them?
It's okay you see, they're only spending our money to destroy us.
"It would make us look bad to defend you."
The federalist society cancer has created a conservative lawyer class that only defends corporate hegemony and guts due process rights. It took 50 years of grassroots activism to get the blatantly erroneous Roe decision overturned and they cower under their beds in the face of Obgerfell. A state AG would get swept into office on a platform of executing pedophiles, but the Federalist society would say they were unfit for the position.
Stephen Richer is a proud federalist society fag
Conservatives gave a quarter of a billion to the RNC election lawyer fund after 2020 … Then Ronna McDaniel sat her fat ass on the money and didn’t hire a single attorney or file a single case.
Starbucks? We don't have time for a hand job right now!
Haha! Are you gonna put your Marbury in his Madison?
Updoot.
Hang out what tho 😂😂 just kidding pede 👍
While brain damaged, this was a bunch of progressives having a temper tantrum about a case that wasn't even theirs. IMHO this one is an even bigger deal... the lawyers that won the recent Bruen 2A supreme court case were asked to resign by their firm for having the nerve to score a conservative victory. One of the biggest firms out there, and the lawyers themselves aren't small names either. https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/gun-bill-lawyers-leaving-firm-after-scotus-ruling/
Brawndo has what plants crave
Electrolytes.
Your children are now in the custody of, PFIZER!
"He talks like a fag, too!"
And his shit's all retarded.
She should get a lawyer.
Yeah I saw that at the end of article too
“There are of course limits to free speech including any kind of incitement to violence but nothing like that happened in this case.”
No limits on free speech. Our society has shown how slippery the slope is when defining “threatening” someone.
Very informative! Thank you! 👍
There are limits - posting links to child progression, for example, should not be protected as free speech in my opinion.
I don’t think that constitutes speech.
Giving out drugs is also not speech.
If you speak a url out loud, is that not speech?
Should Sandmann and Rittenhouse not have grounds to sue over the media actively trying to destroy them?
The problem with this oversimplistic view is that there are so many things that are considered "not speech" that might be speech and some things that are considered speech that might not be speech. The Supreme Court has ruled on many of these things and you are likely to disagree with at least a few on both sides.
Violence against marginalized groups!
Hot air is an absolute rino orgy.
Free speech is not absolute – US law does recognize a number of restrictions to free speech. These include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, harassment, incitement to illegal conduct and imminent lawless action, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising, copyright or patent rights.
Those aren’t limits on speech.
There are specific laws for each. Scroll up a few posts another person wrote a nice lengthy comment that can help clarify.
I'd wager the woman who was fired was factual, polite, articulate, and on point in that conference call.
It's also a safe bet she was interrupted multiple times. Not with legal counters to her argument, but simply shouted down by emotional harpies.
I'm getting the sense there were too many women working at this place.
Helloooo, that is every place.
Women should be allowed to work as secretaries and assistants.
It's too easy to homogenize a group of womens opinions and direction. Thats why shit like this is so easy to believe happens. Women cannot control their desire for social acceptance and will do anything to not be this fired and ridiculed woman. She should sue
Sadly, many men are just as catty these days. I guess the main difference is that most men don't try to change the "culture" of their workplace where too many women live for it.
Nah, a lot of guys are up in arms (up in soy?) about Dobbs. It’s pretty nuts. Like they took all the chivalry they can’t show to women because of equity and put it into anger about Dobbs.
Those are also women.
No! Stop calling every garbage man a woman. That’s part of how we got into this mess in the first place!
Sheesh! 😜
I was told if you consume enough estrogen you become a woman. I'm starting to see their point.
She's right. Even some of the better educated democrats I know and/or follow admit that Roe was a bad case in many ways.
That's the problem with liberalism. Rather than change the law they simply rationalize it away as moot 'cuz they say so. Lots of people were sent to jail for marijuana before it was legalized in many states, and many are being forgiven. If they truly believe abortion is a right they'd accept some losses until the law is changed. Nope, gotta have that magical shield of ignoring what they disagree with to go with their emotional support animal.
And they made a point to produce fewer well educated liberals going forward. I never meet any younger ones, lawyers included, who know or care about facts that contradict their goals...
Their goddess RBG herself said Roe v Wade was bad.
I hope she is enjoying hell.
Came here to say this.
She liked abortion she just thought the legal arguments Roe v Wade used to say it was constitutional were bad
These people need to get off my planet.
Out of my dimension
We could help usher them off, and we may have to before it's over. Stay frosty.
yeah, we can't have lawyers following the constitution, that would be tragic.
Imagine being a lawyer getting fired for agreeing with the Supreme Court of the United States. Haha that wouldn't happen. Oh wait what's this
What's at stake is nothing short of Washington's projected system of total social control of the American people. It desires the power to enact one rule that applies to all people, across State lines as if they didn't exist. Part of the strategy involves psychological tyranny as we now see in the movement for trans sexual children.
People need to step back and see the bigger overall picture like you have.
The politicians have no interest in going there. If they are not a part of it already, they have been told, "go along, get along, or get out of here." The media is completely co-opted. Imagine the haul they took in over the mid-terms? They were throwing million dollar budgets around like it was chump change. Fortunately, we have internet journalists to teach us. Once they have been eliminated, we'll have nothing.
Identity politics are destroying America
......and almost no one recognizes it has all been done for a purpose.
We aren't going to vote our way out. We aren't going to peacefully protest our way out with large upbeat Trump rallies.
When these people learn that actions such as this will result in being dragged out of bed in the middle of the night by angry men with guns, to be never seen again, then we will see this culture become far less trendy among the woke white women currently destroying our country.
Lol lunacy
my favorite part is the 'above the law' article that repeatedly singles her out as being white as if that has any relevance beyond trying to normalize their hateful leftist framing.
Single female lawyer, having lots of sex.
It said a 44 year career so likely in her 60s
Late 60s. Harvard Undergrad Class of 1975, then law school.
She was head of Hogan Lovell's Bankruptcy and Restructuring practice until a couple years ago (many firms make or encourage older Partners to wind down, transition some business, and/or go part time near the tail of their careers and/or mandatory de-partnerize them at about age 70).
Other woke large AMLAW 100 class firms have fired Partners and expressed how they made people in the fitm, say "fear for their lives" for far less.
FYI: https://excessofdemocracy.com/blog/2021/11/ranking-the-most-liberal-and-conservative-law-firms-among-the-top-140-2021-edition
So likely someone who they wanted to get rid because a lot of places try to get rid of old blood.
Not really. Major law firm's normally don't mind older partners hanging around several years with Of Counsel or even Partner titles (re: Partner titles assuming that the firm, like most, bases Partner comp on a metric re: work they personally did/collected on in a year, work they are listed as being Matter Manager for re: other people's work, work they originated - - vs some Partnerships that mostly pay "Lockstep" and all Partners get more or less the same comp).
The idea is older Partners and ex-partners (as noted above, often called Of Counsel or similar titles) are a resource for the younger folk as to arcane rules and regs, often good as supervisors, still have good client contacts (and often retain a solid book of business) and it can take some years to transition "their" clients to other lawyers at the firm (so when the Partner really retires, the old Partner's clients stay with the firm).
Firms don't really make people retire (and even then, they normally are exceptions for people with power and/or good client connections) until 70 or later. The idea with that is, in part, to allow younger Partners to "get" the clients of the older ones (who may have technically "landed" them for the firm decades ago and sometimes do not still deal with some of them personally on a super frequent basis - client "origination" and "client management" credit is normally somewhat horded and forms a fair amount of a Partner's pay and power with in a firm) with a smooth transition. And to avoid certain mistakes or lack or responsiveness than can happen with lawyers that, well, get like Biden.
But, when the Partner in question was head of Hogan Lovell's Restructuring Practice, she would have likely had the "Juice" with the firm's Executive Committee/Managing Partner Committee (or whatever Hogan may call it) to stay (or at least negotiate a better exit). But as the Partner was at least 2 years into wind down mode, her Juice and practical lock on her exiting "portable originations" that would likely leave with her if she left was probably reduced. Plus in her practice of Restructuring (Bankruptcy), there are less repeat customers than say Litigation or Corporate, and thus any fear of the Partner "taking her book of business" was likely reduced.
Bottom line: always consider transitioning away from firms that go Woke or more Woke - due to a merger or otherwise (unless you are Woke); your likely "portable" book of business and origination is usually key re: leverage for almost anything; and generally consider keep your head down a tad (especially on anything that is "all firm" or "all Partners" and not a smaller group or departmental thing) if you are the odd man out unless you have sufficient juice or are actively working on transitioning to a new firm or retiring or something is a hill you are willing to "die on" (say never giving the mother fuckers a Vax Card, or actively working to expose D election fraud). If you keep things smaller group or it is a hill you are willing to die on, especially if you are not handcuffed by super needing your full salary/draw to keep up your lifestyle, then most Partners have a lot more latitude.
Also, FYI, if someone is willing to transition to (and can fully function in their practice area) in a mid-size firm (say 300 or fewer lawyers) vs "Biglaw" and can be a bit picky, most of the day to day Woke can go away. Also select Biglaw firms are less woke than others, but say having large offices in more based states like FL or TX is not controlling (for things such as adopting an "effective" Vax mandate).
Saul Goodman, is that you?
How double dog dare you, sir?
Wearing sexy mini skirts and being self-reliant
Doesn't know why she's sad, so she sees a lesbian therapist.
I almost found this story unbelievable. The woke response to her was almost stereotypical. Unfortunately, I'm sure it happened.
Our judicial branch is the most corrupt of all, and most lawyers are full Marxists at this point.
Perfect system. Four years of pre-selection and grooming, not counting high school, and four year of "finishing" school,
Both my uncles who are well-known attorneys are both cucked faggots who vote blue.
Each divorced. Kids hate them. Ex wives castrated them long ago. Bald wimps who run 5ks for gay rights.
A system Karl Marx himself would envy. Create the opressed/opressor divisions, women and blacks the perfect example. At that point, "We hold the power to solve all nof your problems. We will make you doctors, lawyers, congressmen, and presidents." Never realizing how they have been used, or, caring less if they do recognize it, the target becomes eternally grateful to those who enabled them. Oh, yeah, let's never forget the invisible enemy -- whitey and his culture.
There’s some of us maga lawyers around. But I don’t work for a firm. I wouldn’t last in that sort of woke culture. Solo work is more rewarding in my opinion although it comes with its own list of issues and pitfalls.
My partner and I resigned from our respective big firms in 2012 to start a small boutique practice. The most important factor in job satisfaction is who you work with, not how much money you make or even what you do. It's about people and integrity.
I'm in super low-level muni court stuff. I just grind out the quick flat fees & new clients every day.
99% of my work is helping Mom & Pop style landlords.
It's wild talking with other lawyers who have such a different life than I do. Briefs, motions, depositions.... lol.
A "deposition" in my world is a brief conversation in the court hallway before our case is called in front of a magistrate who will "recommend" judgment in one way or the other.
Honestly, I consider myself more of a businessman than a lawyer at this point in my life.
It's fun and rewarding but sometimes I miss the stability of the W2.
Keep fighting the good fight, fren!
I wish they actually would some time
George Kirby "I can't breeve" lost their ability to breathe?
or like when the Fentanyl kicks in?
She might be a racist but those firing her are definitely misogynists for firing a woman
To bad misogyny falls below racism in the victim ladder. She'll have " no standing."
well she is white, so she has no soul you know.
Did it say she was a redhead?
I’ll bet a lot of these hate-filled people have “hate has no home here” signs in their front yard
We all should have stood up a long time ago. Child sacrifice has become entrenched in USA...
Sounds like an easy win if a lawsuit is brought.
USSR levels
Lawyers hate free speech. Bunch of degenerates.
These women are such victims that they used their power and influence to destroy a ladies career over an opinion.
How repugnant.
Name the fucking law firm!
For real?
After the Supreme Court issued its Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade in June, global law firm Hogan Lovells organized an online conference call for……
F A S C I S M serves at the pleasure of the global tyrants - every time!!!
“I have an opinion that opposes the cult of lib”
“HOW DARE YOU YOU’RE HITLER FUCK YOU”
many such cases
Hopefully all those lawyers are fully vaxed and boosted! ⚰️🪦⚱️
Our enemy hates us and wants to defeat us in every possible way.
Hope she sues them.
Women can't have opinions on abortion
Does not surprise me lefties hate ideas.
She should sue the crap out of them.
Sounds like the Papa John's call to set up John. It's pretty incredible when you can just take away someone's job, team, company or brand for saying true facts
And the worst part about the Papa John's fiasco, is the people that took over just don't understand pizza.
Just a typical corporate "we'd like to hear your opinions and start a discussion, but your opinions and discussions all better agree with the company's position" meeting. Leftist-occupied companies do this shit all the time specifically to weed out and identify "problematic wrong-thinkers". It's quite literally a trap.
I hope she sues. The firm’s response was gross. What happened to diversity is our strength? Doesn’t seem to include a diversity of ideas and opinions.