#attorneys

OMG, congratulations! Yes! For Logical Reasoning, I used Khan Academy — my best friend and I both loved it. It’s completely free and super informative.

For practice questions, I subscribed to LSAT Demon by Ben and Nathan. They have a full bank of official LSAC-licensed questions with great explanations and drilling options.

For Reading Comprehension, I also used LSAT Demon, though to be honest, I didn’t spend as much time on that section. When I took the LSAT, Logic Games were still part of the test, so I focused heavily on those since they were my strongest area.

As an attorney (retired), I know that politicians can "buy" legal advice along the political spectrum. But what they cannot and should not be able to buy is advice based not on the interpretation of the law, but advice that the lawyer is ordered to give under threat, whether it be loss of respect, loss of certain employee perks, loss of job, or in the case of the trump mafia, something worse. When I graduated from law school and passed the bar exam, I took an oath under the state bar rules and the federal bar to protect the state constitution and the US constitution. Giving legal advice based upon the political spectrum doesn't necessarily violate that oath, but giving advice based upon force would. I hope the American Bar Association chimes in at some point.

The human occupying the office of Attorney General of the US, aka AG Barbie, cannot tell me, as an attorney, what the law is and expect me to act accordingly regardless of my own opinion. I would resign.

Excerpt from this New York Times story:

After President Trump lost the 2020 election, his allies thought about what to do differently if he returned to power. One lesson from his first term, they decided, was that government lawyers, even very conservative Republican political appointees, had frequently raised legal objections to ideas he or his White House advisers put forward.

If they got another shot, they said in campaign-era interviews, they would install much more permissive gatekeepers. Now, a month into a term that has been defined by Mr. Trump’s radical challenges to the basic structure of government, his administration is moving aggressively to curb a critical internal check: independent legal thinking.

His appointees have swiftly cleared the Justice Department’s top ranks of career lawyers, even as Mr. Trump stocked leading posts with his own defense attorneys. His aides sidelined the department’s Office of Legal Counsel, bypassing its traditional role of vetting draft executive orders and giving it no acting chief. Last week, Attorney General Pam Bondi added to the purge by firing the top lawyer at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

This subjugation of lawyers has now extended to the Pentagon. Late last Friday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the top judge advocates general for the military. As three-star uniformed lawyers, they give independent and nonpolitical advice about the international laws of war and domestic legal constraints Congress has imposed on the armed forces.