Original Jurisdiction

Many readers of Original Jurisdiction, who subscribed to this newsletter because of my coverage of free-speech controversies at law schools, are deeply interested in—and firmly committed—to the First Amendment and free speech. If you’re one of these readers, then you’ll enjoy my latest podcast episode: a conversation with Professor Nadine Strossen, one of our country’s leading scholars—and staunchest defenders—of civil liberties, including but not limited to free speech.

From 1991 to 2008, Nadine served as President of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). She taught constitutional law for many years at New York Law School, where she was the John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law, and she is the author of Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship (2018). Her latest book, Free Speech: What Everyone Needs to Know, will be published this fall.

In our conversation, Nadine and I discussed her fascinating family background, including the fact that her father was a Holocaust survivor; her early legal career, which included time at Sullivan & Cromwell; and her assessment of the state of free speech in the United States today, which faces threats from both the right and the left. We also engaged in a debate in which I played the role of devil’s advocate, presenting what I think are the strongest arguments for speech restrictions—and Nadine eloquently defended free expression and open discourse, as she has done for decades.

I’m so grateful to Nadine—for joining me on the podcast, and for all her work over the years in defense of free speech and other core civil liberties. You can listen to the podcast via the embed at the top of this post or your podcasting platform of choice.

Show Notes:

* Nadine Strossen bio, New York Law School

* Nadine Strossen profile and recent writings, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)

* The First Amendment Is the Greatest Defense for the Powerless and Marginalized, by Jacob Mchangama and Nadine Strossen for the Daily Beast

* Make Freedom of Speech Liberal Again, by Tunku Varadarajan for the Wall Street Journal

Prefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.

Sponsored by:

NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email [email protected].

Who is the leading public intellectual of the Supreme Court bar? Neal Katyal—Hogan Lovells partner, Georgetown Law professor, and former Acting Solicitor General—would have a very strong claim to the title.

Many SCOTUS advocates focus on winning high-court cases for their clients, but Neal aspires to more: he contributes to our national discourse. His scholarship has been published in top law reviews, including the Harvard Law Review and Yale Law Journal. He writes op-eds for leading newspapers, including the New York Times and Washington Post. He authored a Times bestseller, Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump. He makes frequent appearances on television and radio as a legal-affairs commentator. He comments on the news of the day to his more than 800,000 Twitter followers. And later this year, he’s coming to Substack—exciting news that he shared in my recent podcast interview of him.

I’ve known Neal for a long time, and I’d been wanting to have him on the show for a while. Now turned out to be a great time, for two reasons. First, just last week, he made his 50th oral argument before the Supreme Court—a major milestone that few SCOTUS advocates can claim. Second, May is Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month, and Neal has argued more Supreme Court cases than any other AAPI lawyer—or, for that matter, any other lawyer of color. Congratulations to Neal on his 50th SCOTUS argument, and thanks to him for taking the time to join me.

Show Notes:

* Neal Katyal bio, Hogan Lovells US LLP

* Neal K. Katyal bio, Georgetown Law

* Neal Kumar Katyal, Oyez

* Neal K. Katyal, Chambers and Partners

* Hogan Lovells Partner Neal Katyal Celebrates 50th Supreme Court Oral Argument, National Law Journal

Prefer reading to listening? For paid subscribers, a transcript of the entire episode appears below.

Sponsored by:

NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email [email protected].

If you’ve been defamed, and it don’t look good, who you gonna call?

Clare Locke (if you can afford them). Founded in 2014 by Tom Clare and Libby Locke, who left the partnership of Kirkland & Ellis to build a plaintiff-side defamation practice free from the constraints of Biglaw, Clare Locke has become the go-to firm for major corporations and high-net-worth individuals who have suffered reputational attacks.

I’ve known Tom and Libby for years, and I’ve been meaning to invite them on the podcast for a long time. After they secured what’s believed to be the largest defamation settlement in history—$787.5 million for their client, Dominion Voting Systems, in the landmark litigation of Dominion v. Fox—I couldn’t wait any longer.

So this is actually a bonus episode. I usually post episodes every other Wednesday, I posted an episode last week, and my next episode—which also has an amazing guest—will go live next Wednesday, May 3. But in light of last week’s Dominion settlement, I didn’t want to delay, so I’m slipping in this episode now.

It’s also a double episode, which is why it’s longer than usual—but worth it. I interview Libby and Tom about their interesting personal and professional backgrounds; their decision to leave Kirkland to launch a boutique firm, including why it would be impossible to have a practice like theirs in Biglaw; what it’s like to practice alongside your spouse; how they got involved in the Dominion case, including why the settlement was so darn large; and the future of New York Times v. Sullivan.

In the interest of getting this out in timely fashion, I have not included in a transcript. It’s surprisingly laborious to clean up the auto-generated transcript, since the voice-recognition technology has a long way to go. So if you’d like to get the substance of our fascinating conversation, please listen to our dulcet tones, via the embed at the top of this post or in your podcast player of choice. Enjoy!

Show Notes:

* Thomas A. Clare bio, Clare Locke LLP

* Elizabeth M. Locke bio, Clare Locke LLP

* ‘Brilliant and Lucky’: Clare Locke Makes Headlines by Keeping Clients Out of Them, American Lawyer

* Winning Litigators: Tom Clare & Libby Locke, Clare Locke, National Law Journal

* Clare Locke LLP, Chambers and Partners

Sponsored by NexFirm, which helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email [email protected].

In the last episode of this podcast, I wondered: are boutiques the future of litigation? If you’re looking to make that case, today’s guest would be a star witness.

Last week, leading litigator Christopher Clark left Latham & Watkins, one of Biglaw’s biggest and best names, to launch his own boutique. Together with Patrick Smith, a former colleague of his from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and Rodney Villazor, another former federal prosecutor, Clark is a founding partner of Clark Smith Villazor.

For this new podcast episode, Clark and I discussed his time at the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, which he joined right after clerking; his time in Biglaw, including Dewey & LeBoeuf during its downfall; why he admires his most controversial client, Hunter Biden; helpful advice for representing billionaires; and, finally, a key skill for success as a lawyer—which, sadly, many lawyers overlook.

Thanks to Chris Clark for joining me, and good luck to him, Patrick, and Rodney, as they launch and grow their new firm.

Sponsored by NexFirm, which helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email [email protected].

Are boutique firms the future of litigation? Compared to many of their Biglaw counterparts, they’re often more nimble, innovative, and willing to take risks. Unattached to giant transactional practices, they have fewer conflicts and other client-related concerns, allowing them to take on interesting, cutting-edge cases that Biglaw firms might pass on to avoid controversy.

Founded and staffed by lawyers who left top Biglaw firms, elite boutiques can offer the same if not better lawyering and client service, frequently under more favorable or flexible fee arrangements. And from the perspective of the talent, boutiques often boast enhanced collegiality among partners and partnership prospects for associates.

How do former Biglaw partners build a world-class boutique? I recently spoke with Steven Molo, one of the top courtroom advocates in the country, about how he and Jeffrey Lamken, a leading Supreme Court lawyer, launched MoloLamken in 2009—and turned it into one of the finest litigation firms in the United States, if not the world. We discussed their vision for the firm at its founding, their approach to hiring and retaining talent, how they’ve managed to cultivate diversity in their firm’s ranks, and several current issues in the news, including law school culture wars and the pandemic’s effect on the legal profession. Thanks to Steve for his time, insight, and friendship over the years.

Sponsored by NexFirm, which helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email [email protected].

During my two-year detour into legal recruiting, I was struck by how many Biglaw attorneys, both associates and partners, want to make the jump to the in-house side. As a result of this keen demand, the competition for desirable corporate-counsel jobs can be fierce, with hundreds of applicants for a single opening.

What are in-house employers seeking in their hires? In my latest podcast interview, I explored the topic with Sonya Olds Som, a prominent figure in the world of legal search (and, full disclosure, an old friend). We also discussed her interesting and impressive life and career, which took her from a challenging childhood in Detroit to Cornell Law School to law firm partnership to Diversified Search Group, a fast-growing and highly regarded company in the executive-search industry, where she serves as a Global Managing Partner and leads the firm’s Legal, Risk, Compliance, and Government Affairs practice.

If you enjoy this interview, try and meet Sonya in person, since even a podcast can’t do her justice. She’s helping to organize or speaking at several events in the next few months, including the National Summit of Black Women Lawyers in Chicago (March 30-April 1), the National Bar Association Annual General Counsel Invitational in New York (May 11-12), and the National Bar Association Annual Corporate Counsel Leadership Summit in Minneapolis (July 31). In case you’re not familiar with it, the National Bar Association (NBA) is the nation’s oldest and largest national association of predominantly African-American lawyers, judges, law professors, and law students.

My thanks again to Sonya Som for such a delightful conversation.

Show Notes:

Sonya Olds Som bio, Diversified Search Group

Sonya Olds Som Joins Diversified Search Group as Global Managing Partner, Savoy

How Sonya Som Rebounded From The Recession, And Her Advice For Landing Your Dream Legal Job, by Renwei Chung for Above the Law

Sponsored by:

NexFirm helps Biglaw attorneys become founding partners. To learn more about how NexFirm can help you launch your firm, call 212-292-1000 or email [email protected].

What do you know about the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT)? Are you aware that it’s an Article III court, with life-tenured members who frequently sit by designation on circuit courts across the country? Although I fancy myself an expert on the federal courts, my knowledge of the CIT was pretty sparse until recently.

This began to change last November, when I spoke on a panel about the (problematic) practice of judges getting deeply involved in selecting their own successors. I felt the panel went well, and much of the credit belonged to our excellent moderator, Judge Stephen Vaden (who stepped in at the last minute after the passing of our original moderator, Judge Laurence Silberman). I’ve enjoyed getting to know Judge Vaden over the past few months, and I quickly realized I wanted to have him on the podcast.

Judge Vaden has served on the CIT since 2020. In this interview, he pulls back the curtain on his court, a fascinating cross between a trial court and the D.C. Circuit—and a great place to clerk for listeners interested in clerkship opportunities.

Devotees of the federal judiciary should appreciate this episode for its exploration of the CIT, unique among Article III courts in several ways. But it will also appeal to first-generation lawyers seeking inspiration (Judge Vaden is a farm boy turned federal judge), as well as any lawyers or law students who value sound career advice.

In almost thirty years of following the world of U.S. legal education, from applying to law schools in fall 1995 to covering them today as a journalist, I don’t think I have seen as consequential a time as the current one. To explain the whirlwind of recent developments, I sought out two of my favorite observers of the legal academy: Dan Rodriguez, former dean of the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, and Anna Ivey, former admissions dean at the University of Chicago Law School.

When I asked them to join me, I selected as our topic the U.S. News law school rankings—specifically, the withdrawal of dozens of schools from the rankings, followed by the announcement of significant revisions to the rankings methodology. But it’s impossible to discuss the rankings in a vacuum, so we wound up having a wide-ranging discussion that touched on two other possible major changes—abandonment of the LSAT (or any other test) as an admissions requirement, and an end to affirmative action—and the future of legal education more generally.

How do Anna Ivey and and Dan Rodriguez really feel about the U.S. News rankings? As former rather than current deans, they spoke freely and didn’t pull their punches. And are they worried or hopeful about what lies in store for U.S. law schools? Find out, in this new installment of the Original Jurisdiction podcast.

Gary Feinerman served as a judge for the U.S. District Court or the Northern District of Illinois, with chambers in Chicago, from 2010 to 2022. He also served as the Solicitor General of Illinois, from 2003 until 2007, and as a law clerk to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. In our interview, we discussed why he left the bench, what it was like to clerk for Justice Kennedy alongside two future Supreme Court justices, his most noteworthy case from his time on the bench, how he worked his magic as a Supreme Court “feeder judge,” and the type of practice he plans to build at Latham & Watkins.

Jeh Johnson, currently co-head of the Cybersecurity and Data Protection practice at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, has had a truly remarkable career in law and public service. Over the past four decades, he has gone back and forth between Paul Weiss, one of the nation’s leading law firms, and the federal government. He has served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York (1989-1991), General Counsel of the Department of the Air Force (1998-2001), General Counsel of the Department of Defense (2009-2012), and finally, Secretary of Homeland Security (2013-2017).

I first met Jeh (pronounced “Jay”) Johnson when he was GC of the Department of Defense (“DoD”) and I profiled him for Above the Law. At the time, he told me he thought it would be his last position in public service. But President Barack Obama had other ideas: in 2013, he asked Johnson to join his Cabinet as Secretary of Homeland Security. From December 2013 until January 2017, Johnson led the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), a sprawling agency with some 22 components and 230,000 employees, and helped keep the United States safe.

Remembering fondly our 2011 conversation, and eager to hear about his time as a Cabinet official, I reached out to Secretary Johnson late last year to invite him on the podcast. He kindly agreed, and in our conversation last month, we discussed everything from his being an academic “late bloomer”; what he’s most proud of from his time in public life (interestingly enough, not a specific success like the Osama bin Laden operation or the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell); and his advice on mentorship (specifically, how to be a good mentee).

My timing for posting this episode turned out to be excellent: just yesterday, DHS unveiled Secretary Johnson’s official portrait, a tribute to his service to the Department and to the nation. Congratulations to Secretary Johnson on this honor, and thanks to him for his long and dedicated service to our country.

Show Notes:

Jeh Charles Johnson bio, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP

DHS Unveils Secretary Jeh Johnson Official Portrait, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

An Afternoon With Jeh Johnson, General Counsel of the Defense Department, by David Lat for Above the Law

Prefer reading to listening? A transcript of the entire episode appears below.