bethwilensky.bsky.social
#LegalWriting Professor at University of Michigan Law School. #WilenskyOnStyle. Cardinals and cooking and kids oh my. https://michigan.law.umich.edu/faculty-and-scholarship/our-faculty/beth-h-wilensky
3,600 posts
5,844 followers
616 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
It’s just a very unmovable piece of paper Kannon.
comment in response to
post
But I can't remember either the lawyer or the case! Anyone know? /fin
comment in response to
post
*believed* is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Popes could have burner accounts.
comment in response to
post
Yes!
comment in response to
post
I’m not even Catholic and I love this. And I especially love it for my Catholic friends!
comment in response to
post
I have all of the Ottolenghi books; I'll have to check this one out!
comment in response to
post
This is great! And now I'm ashamed for refrigerating my hummus, but I promise to mend my ways.
comment in response to
post
It's my ambrosia.
comment in response to
post
Yeah, I was wondering exactly this (i.e., how old she is) and I'm sure you're right.
comment in response to
post
I like you too much to sic this job on you.
comment in response to
post
If only there were a Supreme Court case explaining, in excruciating detail, what that means.
comment in response to
post
I think he wants to reopen Alcatraz so that Hollywood can remake The Rock but he got his batshit crazy ideas mixed up.
comment in response to
post
I'd take it!
comment in response to
post
Wish we could clone her.
comment in response to
post
Oh, yes. Thank you for sharing it. (Though we should probably take bets on how long it takes for the Trump administration to pull the Bernstein pieces from the program in response to the op-ed.)
comment in response to
post
I certainly learned something today.
comment in response to
post
Let's do it! We're going to get it into Black's Law Dictionary. Just need to get two mentions in legal opinions. greenbag.org/v13n2/v13n2_...
comment in response to
post
Also, did you all catch the Indiana Jones reference?
comment in response to
post
II love it. And now 'm going to make "one bite at the grape" a thing.
comment in response to
post
Woohoo congrats! But have you considered that there are people on social media who don't think you should get tenure because you have Bad Opinions?
comment in response to
post
How "explicit" does it have to be? digitaledition.baltimoresun.com/tribune/arti...
comment in response to
post
Back when the GOP thought it obvious that children who landed here in harrowing circumstances as refugees ought to stay bc we could offer them a better life. (They were wrong in that case, though I guess they are consistent in being fine w/ kidnapping when it suits their political interests.)
comment in response to
post
Not a citizenship case but your question has real Elian Gonzalez vibes.
comment in response to
post
In my last class of the semester, when I give a ton of real-world advice, one of my students asked "What if I make a mistake?" And it was a great question. Because I was able to say: "You mean WHEN you make a mistake. Like literally every atty before you has done."
comment in response to
post
I started practice in 1998! I remember the first case I worked on that had tons of documents and we had to have a discussion w/ the client about paying for OCR.
comment in response to
post
The problem is that junior attorneys can miss something too.
comment in response to
post
Yep. But the ones who take my advice will run circles around their peers who take the shortcut when it comes to impressing their supervisors in practice.
comment in response to
post
I think that's true, but may require convincing clients that it's valuable to have jrs. do the sort of deep-dive into discovery that will make them valuable in that or similar roles.
comment in response to
post
Or the jr. atty! I learned as a baby BigLaw lawyer that document review and reading depo transcripts made me indispensable. I was likely the only attorney who had laid eyes on all of the discovery, which meant that they couldn't have a meeting without me.
comment in response to
post
Yep. And why wouldn't they? Probably going to require some creative thinking about how to develop jr. attys.
comment in response to
post
Right. But w/ law students at least I can try to convince them that it's in their long-term interests to not use ChatGPT in ways that short-circuit their learning. Harder to make the case that jr. attys should bill time to clients for work that ChatGPT can do, even when it's in the attys' interests.
comment in response to
post
It's definitely makes sense to use it that way. I wonder about the more subtle consequence of - e.g. - 1st yr associates no longer having the experience of poring over depo transcripts. They learn a lot about taking/defending depos when they do those "boring" jobs.
comment in response to
post
Oh, this is such good news! We have similar views when it comes to EH books. (And I am, alas, also at the very end a very long library hold list. At least it will be a serendipitous treat when I finally reach the top of the list.)
comment in response to
post
I actually found it really distressing. No schadenfreude here; just disappointment. bsky.app/profile/beth...
comment in response to
post
Need to be tenure-track for that.
comment in response to
post
Well Isaac Chotiner did an interview.
comment in response to
post
Something something can't be bothered to hire actual professors to teach legal writing.
comment in response to
post
The number of otherwise-smart people who think "the protests were antisemitic" = "universities should have shut down the protests" baffles me. Public universities *couldn't* and private universities *shouldn't*. Fee speech and all that.
comment in response to
post
Forgot to add a link to the full interview: www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a...
comment in response to
post
Everything about it made me sad. I have been outspoken about the ways that some (maybe even a lot) components of the protests were antisemitic AND I have been outspoken about the horror of the Trump admin's free speech violations in response to the protests. It's really not hard to do both. /fin
comment in response to
post
And how she gets from "universities should have done more to combat antisemitism" to, apparently, "It's OK to round up protestors on the basis of their speech." Conflating all protest activity w/ those limited things (like keeping Zionists from buildings) that actually *are* conduct violations. /3