1. Home
2. Daily News
3. ‘It’s Time for You to Leave’: More immigration…

Immigration Law

‘It’s Time for You to Leave’: More immigration lawyers get notices to self-deport

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 25, 2025, 9:32 am CDT

Immigration lawyers outside Massachusetts are also receiving notices to self-deport, despite their U.S. citizenship.

Among the lawyers receiving notices are Austin, Texas, lawyer Hubert Montoya and Salt Lake City lawyer Carlos Trujillo, according to Fortune, KTVX and the Utah News Dispatch.

“It’s time for you to leave,” the notices said.

Immigration lawyers in Ohio, Arizona, Michigan and Pennsylvania have also reported receiving the notices, according to the Utah News Dispatch.

Montoya told Fortune that he laughed when he received the notice.

“I just thought it was absurd,” he said.

Trujillo told the Utah News Dispatch that he has advocated for the immigrant community, but he refuses to think that it is the reason for the notice.

“It probably was a mistake, and I love this country so much that I think my first inclination is just to believe that and leave it at that,” he said.

The notices are part of a what appears to be a mass email campaign telling immigrants that the immigration parole allowing them to temporarily live in the United States has been revoked, according to the Utah News Dispatch.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is canceling paroles that allowed people who entered the United States using an online appointment app to remain in the country for two years, according to previous reporting by the Associated Press. The Trump administration has suspended use of the app.

The Department of Homeland Security sent notices to email addresses provided by the immigrants, including, in some cases, email addresses of U.S. citizens they listed as contacts, according to a statement by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Some of the notices may have been sent to lawyers and other unintended recipients, the agency told Fortune.

The notices being sent are not limited to people who used the appointment app, according to a Customs and Border Protection statement cited by the Utah News Dispatch.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

Fourteen years ago, I wrote an article for a business journal that summarized a dinner conversation I had with my 4-year-old daughter. She asked me to explain “What is a re-sezz-ee-un?” By the end of our conversation, her greatest concern shining through her little green eyes was whether Santa Claus himself would be experiencing any effects of that “re-sez-ee-un.”

Much has changed since that conversation. That particular recession eventually ended, only later to be replaced by what some economists called a second one. The Cubs finally won a World Series. We sent an unmanned spacecraft to Pluto. An unprecedented world pandemic wreaked its havoc, and Donald Trump became our president, not once but twice.

My daughter has seen quite a journey as well. She became a singer, musician, artist, model, cheerleader and even an actress, playing the lead Dorothy in “The Wizard of Oz” at the Apollo Theater. She is a self-taught competitive gymnast and part of a team that made the national finals in Orlando, Florida. Perhaps most important, my little green-eyed girl grew up and graduated from high school, and she is now a college freshman trying to find her place in this crazy world.

Now we sit together, sometimes late into the evening, and we talk. She has never had any interest in becoming a lawyer, but she has always shown an interest in why I do it. Recently, she asked me a question that I haven’t heard in a while. She asked the difference between being a lawyer today and when I started many years ago.

“The difference is I don’t consider myself just a trial lawyer anymore,” I told her. “Clients once hired me to try their cases. They don’t want that today. Now they hire me to help their business avoid trials.” She looked up at the ceiling, raised her eyebrows and nodded, as if she understood me perfectly.

“Does that apply to all lawyers or just you?” Of course she would follow my answer with an even more difficult question. I had to think about that one.

The truth is that the legal industry has changed along with the rest of our world. First came cellphones. Then came the internet. Then came cellphones with internet and all the knowledge of the world instantly at our fingertips. With that came the expectation for instant satisfaction and an acute lack of patience. People want problems solved instantly, with relatively little discussion. When business owners experience unforeseen and unbudgeted issues, they want them resolved quickly. From Caterpillar to the corner restaurant, the last thing companies want is to devote their resources toward litigation. When businesses hire a lawyer, their historic desire for Perry Mason now takes a back seat to the need for Harvey Specter. Businesses no longer want to retain the best trial lawyer; they want the lawyer who can quickly fix the problem without the need for such elaborate time and expense.

This reality has resulted in a generational swing in which lawyers, just like those in other industries, are forced to adapt to be competitive. Don’t get me wrong: A trial lawyer still needs the skill and experience to try a good case; otherwise, the bluff will get challenged every time. Nevertheless, possessing excellent trial skills just isn’t the sole (or even primary) skill anymore that businesses are seeking. The real talent is solving the situation by avoiding the trial.

I believe this is true no matter what kind of trial lawyer you are. Ask an experienced personal injury lawyer how many cases insurance companies settle today compared with 10 years ago. Ask a criminal defense attorney how many accused are going to trial versus entering into a plea bargain.

Ask any business owner what he or she thinks about litigation. Don’t just ask ones who have been sued and lost; also ask those who have sued and won but didn’t consider it a victory because of the amount of legal fees they paid. I have tried hundreds of cases in my 30-year career. I have heard every criticism of our legal industry that exists, and many of them I agree with. Perhaps the worst of all is the notion that the cost of victory can be just as devastating as the agony of defeat. On the other hand, I have never received criticism from a client after we managed to avoid a trial.

I still have plenty of time left to practice law on this journey I began 30 years ago. Fortunately, my kids keep me “young at heart” and provide me with the tools to reinvent my career when needed. One thing is certain: More change lies ahead. Interest rates, government regulations and debtors’ ability to repay their loans were once easy problems to forecast, analyze and solve—but not anymore. Fortunately, I know I can always count on my daughter’s inquisitive green eyes to help me through the journey.

---

Joseph VanFleet is an experienced trial lawyer, focusing his practice on small businesses and community banks in addition to Fortune 100 publicly traded entities and large-scale lenders he has always represented. He has represented clients throughout the country and in numerous complex and multidistrict cases, and he has obtained victories in well over 100 trials, appeals and alternative disputes.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. DOJ opposes court-ordered return of immigrant,…

Attorney General

DOJ opposes court-ordered return of immigrant, suspends lawyer who said he shouldn’t have been deported

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 7, 2025, 2:23 pm CDT

Updated: The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay a federal judge’s order to return an immigrant mistakenly sent to a prison in El Salvador in Central America—a move that followed the department’s decision to place one of its lawyers on indefinite leave, apparently for his admissions in the case.

The government is asking the high court to issue an administrative stay to block the order by U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis of the District of Maryland and to vacate her injunction.

The Washington Post and the New York Times have coverage of the government’s April 7 filing, while the New York Times, CNN and NBC News are among the publications with coverage of the DOJ lawyer’s suspension. Additional stories are noted by How Appealing.

The government application claims that Xinis “ordered unprecedented relief: dictating to the United States that it must not only negotiate with a foreign country to return an enemy alien on foreign soil but also succeed by 11:59 p.m. tonight.”

“While the United States concedes that removal to El Salvador was an administrative error,” the application says, “that does not license district courts to seize control over foreign relations, treat the executive branch as a subordinate diplomat, and demand that the United States let a member of a foreign terrorist organization into America tonight.”

Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused Xinis’ deadline Monday afternoon to allow for a full review by the Supreme Court, the Washington Post reports.

Xinis is an appointee of former President Barack Obama.

The government had alleged that the mistakenly deported immigrant, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, is a member of MS-13, a gang designated a foreign terrorist organization by the United States. Xinis said the government had offered no evidence to show that he is a gang member.

The now-suspended DOJ lawyer, Erez Reuveni, was the acting deputy director of the department’s Office of Immigration Litigation. He had conceded in court that Abrego Garcia should not have been sent to El Salvador, and he had no evidence showing why the immigrant was even arrested, according to NBC News.

“The absence of evidence speaks for itself,” he said. “The government made a choice here to produce no evidence.”

When Xinis asked what kind of practical impediment kept the government from securing Abrego Garcia’s return, Reuveni said he asked the same question when the case was assigned to him.

“I have not yet received an answer that I find satisfactory,” he said.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi told the New York Times in a statement that Reuveni did not follow her order.

“At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States,” Bondi said. “Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences.”

The case is Noem v. Abrego Garcia.

Updated April 7 at 3:25 p.m. to include reporting on Chief Justice John Roberts’ order.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

What are you going to do when you retire? That’s usually the first question after the big announcement comes out. Everyone has plans, but retirees often discover that these were not as sustainable, lasting or rewarding as they’d thought, and they have empty hours to fill. At this point, developing meaningful alternatives can be overwhelming. Time passes, and opportunities are lost.

So well before I retired, I started a list of activities that I could do and might want to do in retirement if I got bored. It quickly reached 16 pages without much time or effort. It’s not a Plan A or a bucket list, and I can’t do everything on the list. It’s only a resource to consult if I’m stuck for ideas or want to reconsider my options.

It’s easy to create your own, and it’s not valuable just for those approaching retirement: Colleagues half my age now realize the value of starting early, not just to plan for retirement but to have ideas ready for any occasion, such as an unplanned sabbatical or a vacation. Regardless of age, one’s circumstances and interests change over the years; with more options ready now, you won’t waste precious time later.

Making an attainable list

I didn’t think that I’d need a list. But a lunchtime conversation with yet another bored, unhappy retiree caused me to reconsider. Back at the office, I opened a Word document an entered several retirement activities that readily came to mind—and then stopped. Racking my brain for more ideas would waste time and turn this into a burdensome project to avoid. So I put the list aside, knowing that I could return later. It was enough just to begin and allow my mind to work in the background.

Sure enough, as I walked to my car, my mind drifted. An idea emerged. It wasn’t new; it had just been buried deep in my brain. I didn’t want to misplace it again, so I stopped to dictate a note on my cellphone. I soon realized that immediately preserving a thought is a critical step in making the process work.

Later, as I read a magazine, new ideas came to light. There was an interesting book that I might like; a bicycle excursion to try in Missouri, which also reminded me of a nice Ohio ride; and a volunteer opportunity with the national Rails To Trails network that I might enjoy. And joining a local bicycle club would replace some of the workplace socialization that I would miss! I’d added five activities to my notes in five minutes. That was easy!

After a few more weeks of this serendipity, I added my notes to the Word document and found that I now had a full-page bullet list of interesting and fun activities. Categories emerged—biking, books, museums, volunteering, among others—so I put them in outline form. This generated more ideas. I liked running, and there were marathons that I wanted to run before my legs gave out. And so on. That took me to two pages without trying.

As I returned to my Word document from time to time, more ideas came to mind: piano lessons I could resume after many years, an incomplete urban studies degree that I could finish, and a geology course that I could take. And projects that I wanted to realize years ago but which had hit a brick wall: a historical marker, a veterans memorial along a local highway, and genealogical research. I didn’t have to or need to accomplish any of these, but the list would remind me that they were there to pursue.

It should be apparent that specificity is critical. Don’t just say “travel;” say where. For “movies,” list titles. Otherwise, your list will be a useless collection of vague notions. Further, specificity will trigger more ideas. You don’t have to come up with everything at once. List a few ideas, and let your mind percolate.

My list includes many minor activities that require little time—visits to certain museums, a research project or a short hike. Even if your Plan A is working nicely, it’s great to have a list of simple things that you can do. They fill an open day quite nicely. Yet they are easily forgotten unless you jot them down.

Closure—doing something for a friend or a relative before the passage of time makes it impossible and leads to regret—is the most intriguing category on my list. It included taking my older sister around Ohio to see places of personal interest but that she never was able to visit. We made that trip soon after my retirement, perhaps just in time. I wish I’d started my list decades ago: similar opportunities lapsed for lack of a constant reminder.

Put your list into action

How should you create your list? There are four guiding principles.

  • The naturalist John Burroughs notes: “How beautifully leaves grow old. How full of light and color are their last days.” Your retirement should be full of light and color, however you define the term, as well. So include only activities that are rewarding. A colonoscopy is not full of light and color. Nor is cleaning out the garage. They belong on some other list.

  • General Dwight Eisenhower cautions: “Plans are worthless, but planning is everything.” Retirement plans aren’t bulletproof. Change happens. So unleash your imagination, and consider possibilities. It’s fine to focus on yourself; these are ideas, not intentions. Who knows what lies ahead? In life, as in war, it’s best to have options ready.

  • The economist Paul Romer observes: “Possibilities do not merely add up. They multiply.”

  • Keep it simple. This is a list, not an essay. Use few words and one line per item.

What goes in it? Anything full of light and color. Routine or bucket list, simple or complicated, long or short, tangible or intangible, practical or speculative.

Everyone has ideas about what to do in retirement, but it’s practically impossible to remember them all when the time comes. It’s a huge project just to try. Many don’t, so they lapse into boredom. I think that’s why my retiree lunchmate was so unhappy.

Fortunately, there’s a simple solution. It’s easy to start early and maintain a big list of possible activities without getting bogged down. And it can serve many purposes: setting priorities, clarifying interests, filling an open day or providing ideas for Plan B.

What I’ve related may seem obvious now, but it’s not intuitive. Nearly everyone, young or old, that I talk to about my list, has an “a ha” moment and thinks it’s brilliant. You’ll have to decide for yourself. But I think you’d find that creating a list is worth the small effort that’s required.

I have. Though retired, I continue to add to my list. It’s now a seventeen-pager—and growing.

---

Douglas R. Melin is a retired chief counsel at the Marathon Petroleum Corp.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Once-homeless University of Chicago law grad…

Homelessness

Once-homeless University of Chicago law grad getting treatment, hopes to return to law practice

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 19, 2025, 12:41 pm CDT

A University of Chicago Law School graduate who lived for two years on the streets of Los Angeles has moved back home with his mother in Virginia and hopes to resume law practice.

Rob Dart moved home in January and has been taking anti-psychotic medication for more than three months, the Wall Street Journal reports. He is taking online continuing legal education classes and hopes to regain his law license.

The Wall Street Journal had chronicled efforts by Dart’s family to help him in articles published this month and in May 2024. He began hearing voices when he was 35 years old and returned to his mother’s home at that time. He received medication and therapy for two years but quit treatment in 2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dart ended up homeless in Los Angeles. His sister and mother had traveled to California to try to help him, but he often rejected them.

The Wall Street Journal’s coverage spurred some people to offer help. One reader set up a tab for Dart at a coffee shop. Another connected Dart’s family with a psychiatrist affiliated with a Pasadena, California, hospital who said he would treat Dart when he was willing to accept help.

Late last year, Dart began treatment at the hospital. But during the wildfires in Los Angeles earlier this year, Dart successfully petitioned for release. Days later, he agreed to return to his mother’s home and began treatment.

Online records indicate that Dart was admitted to law practice in Illinois in 2004 and in California in 2009. He was suspended in California for failure to meet state CLE requirements in 2022 and for failure to pay fees in 2023. He also failed to show compliance with Illinois CLE requirements and was last registered there in 2022.

Dart’s last registered address with Illinois attorney regulators was at the Wilshire Law Firm in Los Angeles.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Meet the federal judge labeled ‘radical left…

Judiciary

Meet the federal judge labeled ‘radical left lunatic’ by Trump, derided by DOJ for ‘micromanaged’ request

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 20, 2025, 8:50 am CDT

A federal judge facing President Donald Trump’s ire because of his rulings on deportation authority was once a housemate with Brett Kavanaugh, a future U.S. Supreme Court justice, at Yale Law School.

Chief U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg, 62, of the District of Columbia “has a history of bipartisan support,” the Washington Post reports, having been nominated to the District of Columbia Superior Court by a Republican president and to the federal court in Washington, D.C., by a Democratic president.

He also appears for speaking engagements at Yale with U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich of the District of Columbia, a Trump appointee, where they emphasize a commitment to rule of law, according to NPR.

But Boasberg is being targeted by Trump, who wrote on social media that the judge is a “radical left lunatic of a judge, a troublemaker and agitator” who should be impeached.

Boasberg is overseeing a lawsuit challenging Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport alleged Venezuelan gang members. Boasberg ordered the administration not to use the law for deportations and told Department of Justice lawyers Saturday that planes carrying the deportees should be turned around.

Three planes carrying 238 immigrants reached their destination in El Salvador in Central America, the New York Times reports. Boasberg gave the administration a Wednesday deadline to provide details on the flights, which was met with a government request for a stay that said the judge’s quest for information was a “micromanaged and unnecessary judicial fishing expedition,” NBC News reports.

“Continuing to beat a dead horse solely for the sake of prying from the government legally immaterial facts and wholly within a sphere of core functions of the executive branch is both purposeless and frustrating to the consideration of the actual legal issues at stake in this case,” the DOJ said.

In a March 19 order, Boasberg agreed to provide the government an extra day to decide whether to invoke the state secrets privilege, “although their grounds for such request at first blush are not persuasive.” Rather than engaging in a fishing expedition, he said, he was seeking information “to determine if the government deliberately flouted” his orders.

Boasberg grew up in Washington, D.C., where his father worked for former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration, according to the New York Times.

He attended Yale as an undergraduate, where he played basketball and also obtained a master’s degree in history from the University of Oxford. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1990.

After graduation, Boasberg worked as a law clerk for a federal appeals judge, as an associate at two law firms, and as a homicide prosecutor at the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, D.C. He was appointed to the District of Columbia Superior Court in 2002 by former President George W. Bush and to the federal bench in 2011 by former President Barack Obama. He also served a seven-year term on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

On the bench, Boasberg “is something of a stickler for footnote brevity,” according to a prior ABA Journal story. He has tossed briefs in several suits for violating a local court ruling banning excessive footnotes.

He is also known “for his booming baritone voice and for peppering legal opinions with colorful language and pop culture references,” according to Reuters. In one opinion, Boasberg “cited a Star Trek reference to the Borg catchphrase ‘Resistance is futile,’” the article reports.

He has also been involved in other cases involving issues of importance to Trump.

“In his 14 years on the federal bench,” the Associated Press reports, Boasberg “has resolved secret grand jury disputes that arose during the special counsel investigations into Trump, oversaw improvements after the Trump-Russia investigation in how the Justice Department conducts national security surveillance, and handled his share of sentencings for rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.”

One of the rioters called Boasberg a “clown” and a “fraud” during a court hearing. Boasberg “calmly listened,” according to the AP.

The deportation suit is J.G.G. v. Trump.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Prosecutors ‘gravely injured’ his reputation…

Prosecutors

Prosecutors ‘gravely injured’ his reputation with misleading assertions, SCOTUSblog founder Goldstein says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 21, 2025, 9:20 am CDT

Updated: SCOTUSblog co-founder Tom Goldstein is alleging that federal prosecutors “seriously misled the court” and should be rebuked for misstatements in public filings in a tax fraud case against him.

Goldstein criticized the government in a bid to compel production of grand jury testimony from an office manager who received an offer of cryptocurrency and other compensation from Goldstein. The government had characterized the compensation as an apparent attempt to influence a witness, an assertion contested by Goldstein in a March 18 document filed in federal court for the District of Maryland.

Goldstein’s court filing said his reputation was “gravely injured by the government’s false and misleading allegations in public filings,” including allegations that he likely tried to bribe the potential witness.

Goldstein said the court should address at a March 25 hearing “whether sanctions against the government are warranted—in the form of a rebuking the government on the record—for its lack of candor.”

Bloomberg Law and Law360 have coverage.

Goldstein, a former high-stakes poker player and U.S. Supreme Court litigator, has been accused in a federal indictment of hiding millions of dollars in income and cryptocurrency transactions on tax returns. He is also accused of using his boutique law firm to help cover his debts and of making false statements to mortgage lenders.

Prosecutors made allegations about attempting to influence a witness while seeking to keep in place conditions of Goldstein’s pretrial release.

The witness was a manager who had decided to leave Goldstein’s former firm, Goldstein & Russell. Prosecutors had said Goldstein was apparently trying to influence the manager when he offered the departing employee a $10,000 bonus, student loan payments and cryptocurrency.

After Goldstein sought disclosure of the grand jury testimony, the government said in a court filing the witness “has explained that defendant did not suggest that the witness not assist in the investigation, and the witness cannot testify as to defendant’s subjective intent.”

Goldstein’s lawyers characterized those caveats as a “belated confession” that discloses “exculpatory witness testimony” by the manager.

Goldstein also said there is another explanation for offering compensation to the manager: to retain the manager to assist the firm in gathering materials responsive to government subpoenas.

Goldstein’s court filing also criticized the government for alleged “false and misleading allegations” that he “used cryptocurrency accounts in violation of his release conditions” and “that he has access to millions of dollars in secret cryptocurrency accounts.”

The government’s lack of candor on the witness issue is “part of a broader pattern of misleading statements and omissions in the litigation over Mr. Goldstein’s release conditions,” the court filing said.

Updated March 27 at 10:37 a.m. to report that the office manager received an offer of cryptocurrency and compensation.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

I’ve spent much of my career in the legal industry as a lawyer and a law firm business administrator. I don’t have the demographic profile of a typical American lawyer or even a typical BigLaw business director. My parents, Italian Americans from Greater Boston (one of whom is a second-generation American) did not graduate from college, and no one in their families went to law school or became a lawyer.

I graduated from law school in 2010, during one of the worst job markets of the past several decades—in the wake of a financial crisis that gave rise to widespread unemployment and wage stagnation. I was always taught to put my nose to the grindstone, to never complain, to eagerly volunteer for more work—whether that meant staying at the office late or working on weekends. “You’re lucky to have the work” was the dominant refrain, and we find that sentiment returning today—in another employer’s market.

When I began my career as a lawyer, I always wanted to learn more and take on more responsibility—the more that I did and produced, the more like a real, worthwhile human being I felt—at least at first. I would do anything to make my family proud. But I slowly became more unmoored, isolated from family, friends and my values. My whole personality was buried under inauthentic, fawning people-pleasing, saying yes regardless of the mental and emotional costs, adding projects and hours in the hope that it would make me feel like I was accepted and belonged.

When you’ve been masking with all your might since you were a small child, you end up feeling incredibly lost, alone, alienated and afraid, unable to develop a clear picture of who you are. You constantly ask yourself whether you really know anything about your personality and values, creating a constant, unbearable sense of dread and extreme dysphoria.

But this kind of strenuous masking is a requirement for success in the corporate world if you are neurodivergent or struggle with mental illness. The expectation to be an extrovert and deliver consistent high performance created a sense of unrelenting feeling of being overwhelmed.

My mental health issues come with an acute sensitivity to rejection, but ironically, this has led to personal and professional habits that have made rejection seem almost inevitable: among them paralyzing perfectionism and rumination. Though it would take years and an almost deadly breakdown to recognize it, I was experiencing acute, life-threatening burnout.

Over the years of acute mental illness, my day-to-day life got darker and scarier. I tried to quell what became hourly panic attacks with various forms of self-medication. As the years passed, I spoke extensively with some of the country’s top therapists and psychiatrists. No one knew quite how to diagnose me or which pills to give me. Commonly prescribed drug therapies and treatment programs failed to help, and they have often made my symptoms worse.

After years, I finally reached a point of physical and psychological exhaustion that made suicide feel like a good (or better) option. I began to have very persistent, frightening thoughts about how nice it would be to simply not exist. In my mind, nothingness looked like rest from constant pain and anxiety and exhaustion, like sleep and perfect, endless peace.

On Sept. 14, 2023, after years of quiet struggle, I tried to take my life in a hotel room in Chicago. The idea of going to sleep and never waking up seemed like my best bet, like the only chance I had left for any relief, the only way to be able to rest my mind, my body and my heart. I was disappointed to wake up in the hospital.

We remain in the earliest days of understanding mental illness, a preparadigmatic stage in which the results of studies often are not replicable, and we find a lack of consensus among the various available models used to explain it.

We hear a lot these days about a mental health crisis, but no one really knows what that means; so much of the information that we would have to know lives on the other side of our collective unwillingness to change the social and institutional structures that are hurting us. It lives in unshared stories and the pain that we hide to try to save face.

Even after having lived with major mental health issues, I can’t shake my outmoded ways of thinking about them and the people they afflict—myself included. We’re all judging people with mental health issues because we’ve been trained to and because we think that tough, capable, high-achieving people are supposed to power through. More than that, we think that highly credentialed professionals are simply not the kinds of people who have mental health issues in the first place.

Top firms attract smart, talented and driven people who personify what has come to be known as hustle culture. We are taught to measure our self-worth in degrees, credentials, job titles, promotions and—perhaps more than anything else—money and status. For many of us, there is no shame worse than looking weak to our high-achieving, high-earning peers. Our culture is one of toxic productivity, fixated on endless growth.

This fact has become more and more conspicuous as so many of our hardest workers and highest earners seem to be the most impoverished among us in terms of free time and peace. Burnout and overwork have now become a crisis and an epidemic, responsible for millions of deaths every year. Deep feelings of isolation and purposelessness seem to be a feature of the prevailing social and economic paradigm, rather than a bug. “Hopelessness is at epidemic levels,” with a growing number of Americans experiencing chronic depression and despair.

Credentialed “knowledge workers” like nothing more than to flex on social media, cultivating the appearance of a person who really cares and would help. But when push comes to shove, stigma remains the dominant and overriding fact and cultural mode, present in every conversation about mental health generally and suicide in particular.

Our glorification of powering through challenges without taking time to recover or assess underlying issues is a maladaptive response to chronic stress and exhaustion. It perpetuates the worst aspects of hustle culture by ignoring the structural and systemic factors that have led us here, isolating people by making us think that everything comes down to our choices.

I’ve had several people, including colleagues, friends and family members, suggest or state outright that mental health issues are not a real disability or even a genuine health issue—at least not as real as physical health issues—notwithstanding the fact that we have known for decades that mental health issues have a real and tangible impact on physical health, and that the brain is indeed an organ and part of the body.

After my suicide attempt, the first thing I heard from those closest to me was: “So when are you getting back in the saddle?” and “I know you can do better—just try harder!” One of my closest family members even encouraged me to end my life. Only my productivity mattered.

Much of the resilience discourse and the practices that we have adopted in the corporate world have become completely toxic. Our culture teaches us that if one is struggling with mental health issues, they are essentially weak and just have to try harder. The prevailing message remains: No one is looking. It’s your responsibility to keep pushing.

---

David S. D’Amato is an attorney, a businessman and an author of popular and scholarly articles. His writing has appeared in the Hill, Forbes, Newsweek, Investor’s Business Daily, RealClearPolitics, the Washington Examiner and many other publications, and his work has been cited by the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch, among others.

---

ABAJournal.com is accepting queries for original, thoughtful, nonpromotional articles and commentary by unpaid contributors to run in the Your Voice section. Details and submission guidelines are posted at “Your Submissions, Your Voice.”

---

This column reflects the opinions of the author and not necessarily the views of the ABA Journal—or the American Bar Association.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyer convicted in fatal shooting of man…

Criminal Justice

Lawyer convicted in fatal shooting of man who attacked him in law firm parking lot

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 10, 2025, 10:07 am CDT

A Connecticut lawyer was found guilty of first-degree manslaughter Friday for fatally shooting a man who attacked him in the parking lot of his law firm.

Robert L. Fisher Jr., 78, of Connecticut was convicted after jurors deliberated for three hours, report Law360, CT Insider and the Register Citizen.

Connecticut law imposes a “duty to retreat” before using force that can cause death or serious injury, according to the Register Citizen and a previous Connecticut Insider story. The duty applies only when a person can safely retreat and is outside the home or the office.

The state does not have a stand-your-ground law, which allows the use of deadly force without a duty to retreat, even outside the home or the workplace, when a person reasonably thinks that it is necessary to prevent death or serious injury.

The June 2021 incident began, Fisher had testified, when Matthew Bromley pulled him from his car and began punching him, claiming that the lawyer had “ruined my life,” according to CT Insider. Then Bromley spit in his face, according to Fisher’s testimony, described by CT Insider.

“I was in fear,” Fisher said. “He was so impossibly angry his face was contorted with rage. I have never seen anything like it. I undid my seat belt and kicked him, so he would be farther away. … I got out of the car to face him. … He charged me in the chest. He was shouting. ‘I am going to kill you.’”

Fisher, who was 74 years old at the time of the incident, said he fired his gun when Bromley charged toward him and reached for his arm. Prosecutors said Fisher could have retreated to his car and locked the door, rather than shoot Bromley.

Prosecutors had cited eyewitness accounts that Fisher stepped forward from his car’s open door before shooting. The forward step showed that the shooting was in revenge for the attack, rather than self-protection, the prosecution claimed.

In his closing argument, Litchfield County State’s Attorney David Shannon described what he thought that Fisher could have been thinking, according to Law360.

“How dare this little man in his beat-up old Saab, wearing his wife beater tank top and his cargo shorts, assault him?” Shannon said. “How dare he [Bromley] do that? He [Fisher] was going to refuse to be a victim. That’s what happened here.”

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Former Duane Morris partner arrested on outstanding…

Criminal Justice

Former Duane Morris partner arrested on outstanding warrant related to Michigan assault case

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 10, 2025, 3:16 pm CDT

Updated: A former Duane Morris partner was arrested on an outstanding Michigan warrant at his condo in Chicago’s South Loop on Friday, the same building where his wife’s body was found in a stairwell in October 2024.

Adam Beckerink, 46, was ordered extradited to Michigan at a court hearing Monday, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The warrant was based on charges of domestic abuse and assaulting police officers arising from incidents at the home in Berrien County, Michigan, where Beckerink’s wife, 36-year-old Caitlin Tracey, lived before her death, WGN-TV reports.

Initial media reports said the warrant was issued after Beckerink did not show up for a pretrial hearing in the Michigan case in October 2024. He also missed his trial that was set to happen days later, the reports said.

But Chicago police said the warrant was for alleged violation of pretrial conditions in the Michigan case, without providing further information, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

Beckerink has not been charged in Tracey’s death. But in the extradition hearing Monday, Cook County Assistant State’s Attorney Danny Hanichak referred to Beckerink as a suspect, according to the Chicago Tribune.

Beckerink’s lawyer, Jonathan Brayman, said Monday and at a court hearing Saturday the warrant was not valid, according to the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times.

Brayman said Monday that his client had attended all his hearings and had not violated any conditions of pretrial release, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Beckerink “is the absolute opposite of a fugitive from justice,” Brayman said on Monday, pointing out that Beckerink was arrested at home.

Beckerink was ousted from Duane Morris after the law firm became aware of domestic violence allegations against him made in court proceedings, including allegations made by his wife when she obtained an order of protection against Beckerink in 2023.

See also:

Duane Morris partner ousted after wife found dead in stairwell and her parents allege domestic violence

Judge denies bid by former Duane Morris partner to stop his wife’s funeral

Updated March 11 at 8:02 a.m. to add lawyer Jonathan Brayman’s assertion that former Duane Morris partner Adam Beckerink had attended all court hearings in Michigan.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.