Latest news with #Biglaw
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
'Biglaw biter': Sidley Austin fires summer intern who started biting co-workers, HR representative
Sidley Austin reportedly terminated a summer intern as she started biting people in the Manhattan office. Global law firm Sidley Austin, the company where Barack Obama and Michelle Obama met for the first time, is at the center of a juicy Reddit gossip this week as the company had to fire a summer intern in its Manhattan office as she started biting people. Accounts and even a photo of a bite mark are doing the rounds with social media users lapping up every detail of how it started, how many people she bit altogether etc. Legal news site Above the Law reported the bizarre thing and named the intern 'Biglaw biter' as the identity of the person has not been disclosed. Even Sidley Austin did not confirm the incident either. The bites were not 'in an aggressive, 'we're beefing' way' – but rather, 'a faux-quirky manic pixie dream girl crossed with the Donner party vibe,' the outlet reported. 'Though I've seen pics of the results post-Biglaw Biter, and 'nibble' is probably too tame a word,' the article's author noted. 'It's unclear why so many people let this go before reporting the Biglaw Biter, but the rumor is she's otherwise personable and there was some reluctance to elevate the matter,' the report said. An X post claimed that her officemate started wearing long-sleeved shirts as she was getting bit. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Is it legal? How to get Internet without paying a subscription? Techno Mag Learn More Undo According to some insiders, by the time the intern was fired, her bite body count reached double digits. New York Post, however, cited an insider who said only five employed were bitten and everything else is an exaggeration. People who got bitten included other summer interns, associate lawyers and even an HR rep. According to a piece of gossip circulating, nobody was reporting the biting incident for some reason. "Separately, this girl also went to dinner with a group of partners and associates and ordered a $2000 bottle of wine, which also came up in her termination meeting as demonstration poor judgment," a screenshot on X claimed.
Yahoo
10-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Why the White House's latest law firm offensive is different from most
Headed into this week, Donald Trump's unprecedented campaign against the legal profession focused on eight prominent law firms — some of which responded to the offensive by fighting back, while others preferred capitulation. The one thing they all have in common: The president conceded that the firms have 'done nothing wrong,' but he's targeting them anyway as part of a damaging and authoritarian-style attack. This week, as Above The Law noted, the list grew from eight firms to nine. Donald Trump signed a likely unconstitutional Executive Order targeting elite litigation firm Susman Godfrey. Similar to the other EOs aimed at Biglaw, the order purports to strip Susman attorneys of access to federal buildings, amongst other provisions. As the president signed the order Wednesday, he noted that his target list included five other firms, which he did not identify. White House aide Will Scharf told Reuters the latest order resembles previous actions the Trump administration has taken against law firms that it says have been involved in the 'weaponization of government or actions of lawfare.' As for whether the latest Trump target will choose appeasement, Susman Godfrey insisted that it will not. 'There is no question that we will fight this unconstitutional order,' the firm said in a written statement. 'We believe in the rule of law, and we take seriously our duty to uphold it.' The broader question, however, is why the president added this specific firm to his enemies list. As a rule, there's been little mystery as to why the other firms were targeted. Indeed, the White House made little effort to hide its motivations, lashing out at firms because they hired lawyers the president doesn't like and/or worked on cases that Trump disapproves of. But with Susman Godfrey, it's not quite as obvious — and while the official order was over 900 words long, none went into detail about the firm's alleged transgressions. (The order noted that Susman Godfrey 'administers a program where it offers financial awards and employment opportunities only to 'students of color,'' which Team Trump apparently finds outrageous, though this hardly warranted an aggressive response from the Oval Office.) So why did Trump target this specific firm? Many of the news reports about the executive order noted that Susman Godfrey represented Dominion Voting Systems in the defamation case against Fox News, and it seems plausible that the president would want to punish a firm that clashed with a politically aligned media outlet. Reuters' report noted that Susman Godfrey 'is also representing Dominion in defamation lawsuits against the president's former personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, former Trump campaign lawyer Sidney Powell, and others related to false claims that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump.' It's also of interest that firm represents The New York Times in its copyright suit against OpenAI and Microsoft. But let's also not forget that it was just last month when Media Matters filed suit against Elon Musk's X (the social media platform formerly known as Twitter), and the progressive media watchdog is represented in the case by — you guessed it — Susman Godfrey. To be sure, I've seen no evidence to suggest that Trump signed an order targeting the firm at the behest of his top campaign donor, but as the dispute unfolds, it's a detail worth keeping in mind. This article was originally published on
