jawathehutt

[deleted]

[deleted]

This is very subject dependent. Big-name environmental law orgs are a "dream" job for a very left leaning profession. They can easily pull in a ton of interns, and they can get a lot of really bright minds right out of law school or big law firms, plus academics, who can pull more law students as research assistants. You may also see a major firm assisting on a case like this as pro bono. Other fields like this are sports law, international human rights law etc.

Now if you apply that to something like a small local business suing a major distributor, odds are the big business is going to have a big edge, they'll have a big law firm, mom and pops will have a little local firm with a hundreth of the resources.

Then at the very bottom is indignant criminal defenders, who may have zero competency in criminal law and only doing it as a court ordered representation or pro-bono, or as a public defender who can give an 5 minutes to a case for every hour the prosecutors can give to it.

It was from DuPont to Virginia Square too, so I think it was about a $25 fare. He told me he was stopping outside an ATM so I could get money and I told him okay and went on my merry way. Buh Bye asshole.

But what about where there are controversies? If my agency, and 8 studies show that there is no significantly statistical correlation between recidivism and Reform Measure X, but 9 surveys show a light to moderate statistically significant correlation, then which approach wins out? Why bother having political appointees at all, when we could just use an algorithm to run metanalysis of data and pick based on which has a higher volume of surveys favoring it.