"Roberta A. Kaplan, the celebrated lawyer who took on former President Donald J. Trump... is stepping down from the law firm she founded..."

"... after clashing with her partners over her treatment of colleagues... Her departure was announced after The Times informed her personal lawyers that it was preparing to publish an article about Ms. Kaplan that would shine a light on complaints about what some employees said was an unprofessional office culture that she presided over.... Ms. Kaplan and her wife are deeply connected to the Democratic Party and she has been a heroic figure to many liberal activists.... Several people whom she worked with told The Times that she had insulted employees, inappropriately commented on their looks and threatened to derail people’s careers...."

Writes David Enrich, in "Prominent Lawyer Roberta Kaplan Departs Firm After Clash With Colleagues/The well-connected attorney, who founded a powerhouse firm at the dawn of the #MeToo era, has faced complaints that she mistreated and insulted other lawyers" (NYT).

Kaplan represented E. Jean Carroll against Donald Trump and won a $83 million verdict. The law firm she founded was supposedly "driven by a progressive mission and free of the macho culture" found in other law firms (as the NYT put it).

We're told that these complaints about Kaplan coincided with her response to Andrew Cuomo's request for her advice on how to fight allegations that he had committed sexual harassment. Interesting. I think Andrew Cuomo is due for a comeback. He should — as rumored — run for mayor of NYC. Perhaps Kaplan can help. Rehabilitate yourself and him in one grand endeavor.

"I, thank God, had no idea what that meant, so I said to him, 'What are you talking about? I’m coming back on Wednesday.' Literally, it was an honest answer. I had no idea what he’s talking about."

Said E. Jean Carroll's lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, reflecting on Trump's saying "See you next Tuesday."

Quoted in "E Jean Carroll lawyer says Trump used coded version of C-word against her/Roberta Kaplan says ex-president directed ‘See you next Tuesday’ remark at her after deposition in unrelated case at Mar-a-Lago" (The Guardian).

According to Wikipedia:

See you next Tuesday (C U next Tuesday) is a common euphemistic backronym for the word "cunt".....

I've always associated it with Stanley Kubrick. It's surprisingly hard to find references to that on the web, but there's this from Roger Ebert: "John Landis... includes the dialog 'See you next Tuesday' in every one of his films, after first hearing it in Kubrick's '2001.'"

Is Trump really going that far out of his way to get women to talk dirty to him? How much speaking in code is going on out there? You risk seeming nutty if you make assertions that you've been spoken to in code. When is it worth speaking in code? When you're luring someone into seeming nutty by accusing you of speaking in code? When you know the code will be understood and you want to get your message out? But here's Kaplan asserting that she "had no idea what that meant" — flaunting her innocence of Trump's scurrilous rhetoric. Did Trump deliberately elicit that performance? So complex. So inane. What would Elvis do?

"Jury Orders Trump to Pay [E. Jean] Carroll $83.3 Million for Years of Defamation."

The NYT reports.

"My life goes on... I will go on living in this tiny cabin. But one thing has changed. I am going to dedicate myself to somehow figuring out a way for the women..."

"... who don’t have my platform to hold men accountable. Robbie and I are going to put our heads together. That’s how my life is going to change. I’m a crone. I’m an elderly woman on a mountaintop. But I think we’ve got a few good years left to figure out a way to end the culture of sexual violence. That’s what I want to do."

Said E. Jean Carroll, quoted in "E. Jean Carroll Discusses Trump’s Comeuppance/Since losing a civil case to the journalist, who accused him of sexual abuse and defamation, Trump has doubled down on his attacks" (The New Yorker). Kaplan is seeking additional punitive damages — not a gag order.

We're told:

Carroll is seventy-nine. She just adopted a new dog, a Great Pyrenees. “She’s right here, Miss Havisham, Sham for short,” she said, gesturing offscreen.

"Robbie" is the lawyer, Roberta Kaplan, who's quoted saying she considered seeking a gag order when Trump, having lost in the defamation case continued to repeat the defamation. But she didn't want the "First Amendment concerns," and she's seeking additional punitive damages instead.

The dog is named Miss Havisham — that is, the character in "Great Expectations" who devotes herself extravagantly to her disappointment in men. At trial, there was an unsuccessful attempt to introduce evidence that she'd once named a dog/cat "Vagina." 

"She actually indicated that she loved it. Okay? She loved it until the commercial break. In fact, I think she said it was sexy, didn't she? She said it was very sexy to be raped."

Said Donald Trump, in his deposition, quoted in "Trump claimed woman who accused him of sexual assault in a luxury department store said 'rape was sexy' and 'indicated that she loved it'" (Insider). The deposition was made public on Friday.

Carroll's attorney Roberta Kaplan then asked the former president: "So, sir, I just want to confirm: It's your testimony that E. Jean Carroll said that she loved being sexually assaulted by you?"

That gave Trump the opportunity to clarify that he was just talking about something he heard her say in an interview she did on television:

"At one of their debates, Mr. Biden accused Mr. Trump of treating the Justice Department like his 'own law firm' in the suit, filed against him by the writer E. Jean Carroll."

"'What’s that all about?' he sarcastically asked. But on Monday night, nearly eight months after Mr. Biden’s attack, his own Justice Department essentially adopted Mr. Trump’s position, arguing that he could not be sued for defamation because he had made the supposedly offending statements as part of his official duties as president. In a brief filed with a federal appeals court in New York... the Biden administration’s Justice Department, now led by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland... said that when Mr. Trump had denied raping Ms. Carroll, through the White House press office or in statements to reporters in the Oval Office and on the White House lawn, he was acting within the scope of his office. 'Elected public officials can — and often must — address allegations regarding personal wrongdoing that inspire doubt about their suitability for office,' the department lawyers argued, adding, 'Officials do not step outside the bounds of their office simply because they are addressing questions regarding allegations about their personal lives.' Ms. Carroll’s lead lawyer, Roberta A. Kaplan, reacting to the new filing, said that as 'horrific' as the alleged rape was, it was 'truly shocking that the current Department of Justice would allow Donald Trump to get away with lying about it.'"

From "Biden Justice Department Seeks to Defend Trump in Suit Over Rape Denial/Donald Trump is facing a defamation lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll, who has accused Mr. Trump of raping her" (NYT).

It's not about Donald Trump anymore. It's about presidential power, and the new President needs and wants to defend that power. Presidents are attacked, often about personal matters, and they defend themselves. That turns into a defamation suit. That's going to happen again and again if it's allowed. As President, Joe Biden can easily see "What’s that all about?"

Goodbye to Edith Windsor.

"Edith Windsor, the gay-rights activist whose landmark Supreme Court case struck down the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013 and granted same-sex married couples federal recognition for the first time and rights to myriad federal benefits, died on Tuesday in Manhattan. She was 88.... Four decades after the Stonewall Inn uprising fueled the fight for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights in America, Ms. Windsor, the widow of a woman with whom she had lived much of her life, became the lead plaintiff in what is widely regarded as the second most important Supreme Court ruling in the national battle over same-sex marriage rights."

From the NYT obituary.

ADDED: In 2013, I blogged about the great New Yorker article, "How Edith Windsor fell in love, got married, and won a landmark case for gay marriage."

It begins:

"Fuck the Supreme Court!” Edith Windsor said, one hideously hot morning in June, when she’d had just about enough. Then she sighed and mumbled, “Oh, I don’t mean that.” What she really meant was that she was hot, she was tired of waiting, and, most of all, she was tired of being told what to do. “I’m feeling very manhandled!” she said.

It was Windsor’s eighty-fourth birthday, and she was spending it staring at a laptop screen as information from scotusblog.com flashed by in a typeface too small for her to read comfortably. Four years earlier, Windsor’s partner of more than forty years, Thea Spyer, died, leaving Windsor her sole heir. The two were legally married in Canada, in 2007, but, because of the Defense of Marriage Act, Windsor was not eligible for the exemption on estate tax that applies to husbands and wives. She had to pay $363,053 in taxes to the federal government, and $275,528 to New York State, and she did not think that was fair.

There's some excellent material about lawyering, including getting the right plaintiff as the face of the issue. One "experienced movement attorney" explains that "Women are better than men" and "post-sexual is better than young." Windsor was not just female and presumably "aged out of carnality," but, we're told, didn't "look gay."

Her pink lipstick and pearls would make it easier, [her lawyer Roberta] Kaplan knew, for people across the country to feel that they understood her, that she embodied values they could relate to.

Some movement lawyer types thought Windsor was the wrong plaintiff because she was too rich, and her legal problem was a problem of a rich person. Who owes $600,000 in taxes? What kind of civil rights movement forefronts suffering of that kind?

"There were these calls," Kaplan said. "These people from Lambda were like, 'We really think that bankruptcy is the perfect venue to challenge DOMA,' because they had a bankruptcy case they wanted to bring. Finally, I couldn't stand it. I said, 'Really?  I don't want to be disrespectful or classist, but do you really think that people who couldn't pay their personal debts are the best people to bring the claim?"...

Kaplan was convinced that Americans dislike taxes even more than they dislike the rich...

"How Edith Windsor fell in love, got married, and won a landmark case for gay marriage."

A great article by Ariel Levy. Worth subscribing to The New Yorker to get access. I had The New Yorker in audio podcast form, and this article inspired me to subscribe to the print edition. It begins:

"Fuck the Supreme Court!” Edith Windsor said, one hideously hot morning in June, when she’d had just about enough. Then she sighed and mumbled, “Oh, I don’t mean that.” What she really meant was that she was hot, she was tired of waiting, and, most of all, she was tired of being told what to do. “I’m feeling very manhandled!” she said.

It was Windsor’s eighty-fourth birthday, and she was spending it staring at a laptop screen as information from scotusblog.com flashed by in a typeface too small for her to read comfortably. Four years earlier, Windsor’s partner of more than forty years, Thea Spyer, died, leaving Windsor her sole heir. The two were legally married in Canada, in 2007, but, because of the Defense of Marriage Act, Windsor was not eligible for the exemption on estate tax that applies to husbands and wives. She had to pay $363,053 in taxes to the federal government, and $275,528 to New York State, and she did not think that was fair.

There's some excellent material about lawyering, including getting the right plaintiff as the face of the issue. One "experienced movement attorney" explains that "Women are better than men" and "post-sexual is better than young." Windsor was not just female and presumably "aged out of carnality," but, we're told, didn't "look gay."

Her pink lipstick and pearls would make it easier, [her lawyer Roberta] Kaplan knew, for people across the country to feel that they understood her, that she embodied values they could relate to.

Some movement lawyer types thought Windsor was the wrong plaintiff because she was too rich, and her legal problem was a problem of a rich person. Who owes $600,000 in taxes? What kind of civil rights movement forefronts suffering of that kind?

"There were these calls," Kaplan said. "These people from Lambda were like, 'We really think that bankruptcy is the perfect venue to challenge DOMA,' because they had a bankruptcy case they wanted to bring. Finally, I couldn't stand it. I said, 'Really?  I don't want to be disrespectful or classist, but do you really think that people who couldn't pay their personal debts are the best people to bring the claim?"...

Kaplan was convinced that Americans dislike taxes even more than they dislike the rich...