Want to get this daily news briefing by email? Here's the sign-up.

WHAT WE'RE WATCHING

RESERVING JUDGMENT - Big Law has thus far proven much better than the U.S. Supreme Court at keeping its opinions from leaking. As Law.com's Patrick Smith reports, large law firms have been noticeably mum since a draft SCOTUS opinion reversing Roe v. Wade was made public. The silence may be temporary, however. In interviews, leaders of several Am Law 100 firms, speaking anonymously due to the debate around the issue, told Smith that firm management feels constrained to talk about the decision publicly because it's still a draft ruling and it's not the law right now. But they expected some firms will take a public stand once the final decision comes out, even if public messaging is fraught with the risk of alienating employees, clients and others. "The hallmark of a good business leader is to do what is best for your clients, your people and your community," said one firm leader, adding that that becomes a hard issue when within the client base, office and surrounding community there is dissonance. "It would be hard to put out a statement even if 80% of your firm agrees with you," the leader said.

ZOOM VS. ROOM - If you thought attorneys were less than enthused about returning to the office to do work they could do more easily from home, just imagine how they feel about getting dragged into the courtroom for hearings they could have done over video. Actually, you don't have to imagine because Law.com's Brad Kutner talked to lawyers about this very issue. While many litigators still crave the courtroom when it comes to big-ticket items like trials and oral arguments, their appetite for making insanely long commutes to attend insanely short hearings appears to be all but gone at this point. "There's no reason this couldn't have been done via Zoom," remarked one attorney who, after years of digital court appearances, is once again taking cross-country flights for 15-minute hearings. The good news is, similar to return-to-office policies, talent may dictate a more reasonable path forward for court proceedings. "We lose great talent every year because the life of a litigator is not sustainable for many lawyers," said Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll Partner and Harvard Law adjunct professor Betsy Miller, adding, "Hybrid access to courts, where some matters are presented remotely and others in person, is the wave of the future. Just because we did it one way in the past doesn't mean that's the best way forward."

GO PRO - Running a midsize law firm—it's just like running a large firm only, y'know, smaller, right? Wrong! At a time when the legal industry is undergoing monumental transformations, it's never been more important to understand and appreciate the unique aspects of leading a mid-market firm. That's why we're so excited to announce the launch of Law.com Pro Mid-Market. This exclusive membership brings pressing legal industry trends into context in the midsize law firm industry, delivering market-level details on key performance indicators and strategic growth opportunities. Nowhere else can you get this combination of strategic news, analysis, and data on business of law issues tailored to the midsize law firm. Check out www.law.com/pro-mid-market and explore features such as executive briefings, webcasts, business of law editorial content, regional takeaways, and all new regional Market Hub Pages powered by Law.com Compass. And, on May 25th, join us for our first live webcast: How Mid-Market Firms Are Thriving in a Competitive Environment. A panel of ALM's expert editors and analysts as well as Aaron Boersma from Google and Marcie Borgal Shunk from The Tilt Institute are joining for a review of the new website and a discussion around the strategies and approaches helping midsize firms find success in a tense and challenging environment. Register to join right here.

GOP IP - The Republican National Committee sued John Canegata, Robert Schanfarber and the Virgin Islands Republican Party a/k/a VIGOP Friday in Virgin Islands District Court for trademark infringement. The court action, filed by Barnes, D'Amour & Vogel, contends that the defendants have no official relationship with the Republican Party of the Virgin Islands and are using various RNC trademarks without authorization to solicit political donations. Attorneys have not yet appeared for the defendants. The case is 3:22-cv-00037, Republican National Committee v. Canegata et al. Stay up on the latest deals and litigation with the new Law.com Radar.  

EDITOR'S PICKS