Trump prosecutors' evidence backs Michael Cohen's testimony, California shelves plan to create its own bar exam, and more ??
Reuters Legal
From the courts to law firms, we bring you the latest legal news. Subscribe to our newsletters: https://bit.ly/3nhgllA
?? Good morning from The Legal File! Here is the rundown of today's top legal news:
?? Trump prosecutors' hard evidence bolsters Michael Cohen's testimony, experts say
Donald Trump 's lawyers at his New York criminal trial have portrayed his estranged former fixer Michael Cohen as a liar and Trump-hater who acted alone to pay off a porn star, but legal experts say prosecutors have largely backed up his testimony with the accounts of others, phone logs and other hard evidence.
Trump's onetime lawyer, Cohen testified for the prosecution this week that Trump directed him to pay adult film actress Stormy Daniels $130,000 to stay quiet before the 2016 election about an alleged 2006 sexual encounter. He testified that Trump then approved a plan to fudge records to cover up the deal.
During cross-examination, defense lawyer Todd Blanche sought to undermine Cohen's credibility , portraying him as a turncoat falsely implicating his former boss out of spite. The defense laid the groundwork to argue that Trump was not involved in the details of the reimbursements to Cohen at the heart of the case.
Although prosecutors failed to fully corroborate Cohen's versions of his one-on-one conversations with Trump, they largely established Trump was aware of the scheme, portraying him as a micromanager of his family business and finances, said Professor Rebecca Roiphe at New York Law School.
"Part of what the prosecution did well is to corroborate other pieces of Michael Cohen’s testimony so completely," adding: "There’s a lot of circumstantial evidence connecting Trump to the payments," Roiphe, a former prosecutor with the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, said.
?? California shelves plan to create its own bar exam
The State Bar of California on May 16 pumped the brakes on a plan to develop its own bar exam that can be administered online — a change the financially struggling organization projects would save as much as $4 million a year.
The State Bar’s Board of Trustees withdrew from its meeting agenda a proposal to hire Kaplan North American to develop multiple-choice questions akin to what now appears on the Multistate Bar Exam — the daylong 200 multiple-choice-question section known as the MBE.
Approval of the plan would mean a full break from the national bar exam developed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners. It also would indicate that California will not transition to Next Gen Bar Exam, the redesigned national test set to debut in July 2026 that 18 states have already adopted. The plan, now on hold, calls for California to give its own bar exam starting in February 2025.
Deans of 13 California-accredited law schools had asked the state bar last month to delay adoption of the plan, calling the 10-month timeline "hasty, risky, and poorly planned."
Developing its own exam would enable California to administer the attorney licensing test either fully or partially online. The State Bar estimates that the change would save as much as $4.2 million annually because it would no longer need to rent out convention centers or other large spaces twice annually for examinees to give the test.
Examinees would also save on travel and hotel costs, according to the proposal. The state bar’s admissions arm is currently operating in a deficit, and the entire organization is facing a budget shortfall.
领英推荐
?? Column: Tesla told law firm ‘relationship about to be terminated’ in spat over law professor brief – email
Did?Tesla?bully?Holland & Knight?to squelch a friend-of-the-court brief by a Delaware law professor who was also a consultant at the firm?
When that accusation surfaced earlier this week in a filing by retired?University of Delaware?professor?Charles Elson, Elson said Holland & Knight told him in an email about Tesla’s purported threat to pull its work from the firm if Elson filed an amicus brief criticizing Tesla’s plan to reinstate CEO?Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package in a new shareholder vote.
Elson didn’t include the email in his original filing, but columnist?Alison Frankel?has now seen it. On its face, Frankel says, it seems to back Elson’s account — but in a late-breaking twist, Holland & Knight told Frankel that it included an “incorrect” account in the email. The firm continues to deny that it was pressured by Tesla.
??? US Supreme Court upholds consumer finance watchdog agency's funding mechanism
The US Supreme Court on May 16 upheld the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's funding mechanism in a challenge brought by the payday loan industry, handing a victory to President Joe Biden's administration and a setback to the agency's conservative critics.
The 7-2 decision, authored by conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, reversed a lower court's ruling that the CFPB's funding design violated a provision of the US Constitution called the 'appropriations clause' giving Congress the power of the purse. The agency draws money annually from the Federal Reserve instead of from budgets passed by lawmakers.
Biden called the decision "an unmistakable win for American consumers," touting how the agency under his administration has provided nearly $9 billion in consumer relief and is working to save Americans $20 billion annually going forward on credit card late fees, overdraft fees and other "junk fees."
"In the face of years of attacks from extreme Republicans and special interests, the court made clear that the CFPB's funding authority is constitutional and that its strong record of consumer protection will not be undone," Biden said in a statement.
?? That's all for today, thank you for reading?The Legal File, and have a great weekend!
For more legal industry news, read and subscribe to The Daily Docket.