Congratulations to newlyweds Stefanie Schneider and David Alpert, voted Couple of the Week by ATL readers in last week's LEWW poll.

Today, our five May Couples of the Week compete for Couple of the Month honors. It's a very strong field, including an Olympic medalist, a Wachtell associate, and a wedding officiated by a future Supreme Court Justice. Here are the couples:

1. Leslie Tobin and Nathan Ostrander

2. JoAnn Kamuf and Rusty Ward

3. Sada Jacobson and Brendan Bâby

4. Sabrina Charles and Jamie Dycus

5. Jessica Hertz and Christopher Angell

Vote for your favorite, after the jump.

The big news story for today, as noted in Morning Docket, is the bankruptcy filing of General Motors. Developments on the GM front are being closely covered over at our sister site, Dealbreaker (which also welcomes a new writer today).

There are some legal angles to the GM story, of course. The bankruptcy will generate lots of work for several top firms, as noted by the WSJ Law Blog and Am Law Daily.

But you don't need a law degree to play a major role in this drama. From the New York Times:

It is not every 31-year-old who, in a first government job, finds himself dismantling General Motors and rewriting the rules of American capitalism. But that, in short, is the job description for Brian Deese, a not-quite graduate of Yale Law School who had never set foot in an automotive assembly plant until he took on his nearly unseen role in remaking the American automotive industry....

"There was a time between Nov. 4 and mid-February when I was the only full-time member of the auto task force," Mr. Deese, a special assistant to the president for economic policy, acknowledged recently as he hurried between his desk at the White House and the Treasury building next door. "It was a little scary."

Maybe more than a little scary. But YLS grads students can do anything, right?

Find out how Brian Deese landed this gig, and take our reader poll asking what should be done with GM, after the jump.

How should the federal and state governments deal with their depleted coffers? Here's one idea, from Nick Gillespie of Reason.com, in yesterday's New York Times:

Legalize drugs and then tax sales of them. And while we're at it, welcome all forms of gambling (rather than just the few currently and arbitrarily allowed) and let prostitution go legit too. All of these vices, involving billions of dollars and consenting adults, already take place. They just take place beyond the taxman's reach.

Legalizing the world's oldest profession probably wasn't what Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, meant when he said that we should never allow a crisis to go to waste. But turning America into a Sin City on a Hill could help President Obama pay for his ambitious plans to overhaul health care and invest in green energy. More taxed vices would certainly lead to significant new revenue streams at every level. That's one of the reasons 52 percent of voters in a recent Zogby poll said they support legalizing, taxing and regulating the growth and sale of marijuana.

Are ATL readers more or less libertarian than the general public? In a prior poll, almost 70 percent of you voted in favor of legalizing prostitution.

We know how L.A.'s dopest attorney feels -- but what's your opinion of pot? Vote in this poll, and debate in the comments.

Paying With Our Sins [New York Times]

Earlier: A Seminal Question: Should Prostitution Be Legalized?
Adventures in Lawyer Advertising: 'The Dopest Attorney'

As noted in yesterday's Morning Docket, President Obama has reportedly narrowed his search for a Supreme Court justice to a shortlist of six. From CNN:

Among the finalists are federal appeals court judges Sonia Sotomayor and Diane Wood, and Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, said the sources, who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to speak by the White House.

Women make up all but one of the top candidates currently being given serious scrutiny, the sources said.

Also on the list, a source said, was California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno. The 60-year-old Los Angeles, California, native was not among the early favorites mentioned by legal analysts and the media. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs previously hinted some of the names under consideration were under the political radar.

Who will get the nod? To be totally honest, it's pretty impossible to say at this point. Once you get down to a short list of a half-dozen, the choice belongs to the president (as the White House seems to be emphasizing to interest groups). Anything can happen.

President Obama will meet personally with some of the finalists, and his final choice will no doubt be influenced by those meetings. A leading contender can kill his or her chances by coming across poorly in the interview (as former Judge J. Michael Luttig did when he met with President Bush, according to Jan Crawford Greenburg in Supreme Conflict).

But none of this will stop us -- or anyone else -- from speculating. Speculation is fun! And since we probably won't have a nominee until after Memorial Day, for the reasons identified by Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic, we might as well pass the time with parlor games.

Additional discussion, plus a pair of polls, after the jump.

ATL readers, there are many names being bandied about as potential nominees for the Supreme Court. We've narrowed the list to nine people who have been mentioned by at least two of the following outlets: BLT, AP, and the SCOTUSblog.

That the next Supreme Court justice will lack a Y chromosome is a virtual certainty, but we've thrown a few token males into the poll anyway. Who strikes your fancy?

Voting has ended for last week's Couple of the Month polls, so it's time to announce the winners. The January poll was extremely close; the February and March crowns were captured decisively by couples associated with the Obama machine and the Kennedy dynasty, respectively.

Check out the results, after the jump.

Easter weekend was a slow one for weddings, with the New York Times featuring only one couple eligible for LEWW consideration. We're taking this opportunity to catch up on Couple of the Month voting for January, February, and March.

Below the jump, you'll find write-ups on all our 2009 weekly winners so far, plus the opportunity to cast your vote for the strongest legal-eagle couple from each month. Polls close Monday at noon; we'll announce the winners next week.

Happy voting!

Tonight, the "real" Sweet Sixteen games will play out on NCAA courts. Here at ATL, the NCAA-styled ATL March Madness for Law Firms continues. Sixteen firms remain in the tournament hoping to be crowned Biglaw's safest -- the place where you're least likely to get laid off.

Thirty-two firms entered the tournament, based on Vault prestige rankings. Thousands of ATL readers voted to eliminate sixteen firms in the first round. There was only one upset of a higher-ranked seed: Linklaters (V26) beat Latham (V7). The Magic Circle firm's magic run may not last though. Kirkland has a solid lead over the UK-based firm at the moment.

Will there be more upsets in the Sweet Sixteen? Over 4,000 votes are in since voting started on Tuesday and two of the contests are nail-biters: Skadden vs Paul Weiss and Davis Polk vs Debevoise.

Check out the brackets and vote on the next four match-ups, after the jump.

Last week, we brought you our NCAA-tournament style March Madness for Law Firms. We took the top 32 firms from the Vault prestige ratings and asked you to vote on which firms were the "safest" -- the places where you're least likely to get laid off.

After Round One, we're down to the Sweet (Safe) Sixteen.

The higher-ranked teams firms won in all of last week's contests but one: Magic Circle firm Linklaters (V26) upset 2008 March Madness tournament champ Latham (V7). Sadly, Latham's bench was not as deep this year. Apparently, voters disagreed with this line of reasoning.

There were two particularly close matches. As predicted by one commenter:

Gibson v Wilmer in the first round is gonna be a close race.

Gibson Dunn won out, but barely, while Kirkland eked out a victory over Jones Day.

The most popular match with 6226 votes was Ropes & Gray vs Davis Polk & Wardwell. Check out which firms advanced, and vote on the first four match-ups of the Sweet Sixteen round, after the jump.

We started our ATL March Madness for Law Firms on Tuesday. Through this NCAA-style tournament, with brackets and seeding, we will crown Biglaw's safest firm -- the place where you're least likely to get laid off. Yes, we know it's irreverent; but we're a legal tabloid. Irreverence is what we do.

We've taken the top 32 law firms from the Vault prestige rankings. Last year, we asked you to vote on the coolest law firm. You chose Latham. Yeah...

This year, we're posing a more important question. We are asking you to vote to decide which of the firms is the safest. Where are you most likely to keep your job?

Here are the brackets:

Voting on the first eight match-ups started on Tuesday; now, we bring you the face-offs between the other 16 firms at the top of the Vault. Polls close on Sunday. You vote to determine who will go to the Sweet (Safe) Sixteen, after the jump.

In lieu of Wednesday's ATL / Lateral Link featured job survey post -- lolcat lover Justin Bernold is on vacation -- we bring you a questionnaire about a topic near and dear to your hearts: Continuing Legal Education (CLE).

If you're at a firm that's experiencing a slowdown due to the downturn, with many free (and non-billable) hours to kill, now is a good time to rack up CLE credits. In Notes from the Breadline, Roxana wondered: can CLE credits be rolled over, like cell phone minutes? In some jurisdictions, yes.

To take the survey, which serves both editorial and marketing purposes for us, please CLICK HERE. You can also share your thoughts on CLE in the comments.

Your feedback is greatly appreciated. Thanks!

CLE survey for ATL [SurveyMonkey]

Based on my informal count, some 585 attorneys and staffers were laid off yesterday or today. And that is not counting however many people are hitting the street from Holland & Knight today (we are still waiting on a firm statement of official numbers), or however many 3Ls were essentially fired from Luce Forward today when their offers were rescinded.

As I said earlier, maybe we can explain some of this by a collective attempt to avoid giving people bad news on Friday the 13th. It could also be an attempt by firms to let people go before anybody takes off for the long weekend coming up.

Still, it seems to me like today deserves its own special name. Sure we can call it "black Thursday," that's already happened before.

Take the poll below to register support for your preferred moniker. Or supply additional suggestions that the ATL editing crew didn't come up with.

In the meantime, I'll be pouring out a forty for the fallen.

Update (5:50): Change that count to 828. The WSJ Law Blog is now reporting that Holland & Knight laid off 70 lawyers and 173 staffers. Check here for our Holland & Knight coverage from this afternoon.

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of law firm layoffs

We're constantly sending surveys and polls your way. That's because blogging is an interactive medium: we talk to you, and you talk back to us. We couldn't do our jobs without all the tips and info we get from you, via email, comments, and yes, surveys.

We hope that one more survey won't kill you. Please take a few seconds to fill out our anonymous reader survey, which gives us information about our readership demographics (which we use for both editorial and marketing purposes). You can access the survey by clicking here.

And please don't overlook the final question, in which you can offer us editorial feedback -- what you like, what you dislike, and what you'd like to see more or less of in these pages. Thanks.

P.S. In case you find the educational categories a little confusing, "post grad work" means you've done some post-graduate work, but aren't done yet (e.g., you're in law school). "Post grad degree" means that you have completed at least one post-graduate degree. If you have completed one such degree, like a JD or a master's degree, but are in the process of getting another, like an LLM or PhD, check off the "post grad degree" box.

Above the Law reader survey - February 2009 [Survey Monkey]

As we type this, our fingers are still thawing from standing in the cold on the National Mall during today's inauguration. The number of people willing to brave the cold was impressive. Every time President Barack Obama appeared on a jumbotron screen, the crowd went crazy with shouts of "O-bam-a" and "Yes, we did."

The crowd quieted down in order to hear Obama take the oath of office. But what followed was a bit confusing. SCOTUS Chief Justice and now-President Barack Obama appeared to be talking over one another. In the crowd, people started asking, "Who screwed it up?"

MSNBC.com reports that Roberts is to blame:

The Constitution prescribes the text: "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and will to best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

But Chief Justice John Roberts, using no notes, flubbed his lines, and Obama knew it.

First, Obama jumped in before the "do solemnly swear" phrase, which seemed to throw the chief justice off his stride. Roberts rendered the next phrase as "that I will execute the office of President to the United States faithfully."

"That I will execute," Obama repeated, then paused like a school teacher prompting his student with a slight nod. Roberts took another shot at it: "The off ... faithfully the pres ... the office of President of the United States."

Is there a little pro-Obama bias there? We're not so sure Roberts is totally to blame. As one ATL commenter says:

First Flub: Obama. Roberts proceeds with the swearing in and Obama jumps the gun before Roberts gets done. Second Flub: Roberts.

Watch the video here. What do you think?

Read the transcript from MSNBC.com, and see our take, after the jump.

In an ATL / Lateral Link survey posted on New Year's Eve, we announced your nominees for the 2008 ATL Commenter of the Year.

Almost 1,800 of you have voted since, and several of the nominees posted their thoughts in comments to the survey post.

Nominee Jack Bauer wrote in:

It's good to know that I still have some friends. My track record with friends isn't exactly stellar, seeing how I shot Curtis in the throat and I'm pretty sure Tony has become a terrorist. For those of you who had to work over Christmas, don't feel too bad, I got a weekend assignment dealing with breach of contract in the Middle East.

Unfortunately, the terrorists appear to have taken out Jack's friends' communication network. Only 81 of them were able to vote for him.

Hang in there, Jack. You may not have made it to Day 2 in our poll, but we're still looking forward to a strong season from you in 2009.

Read on after the jump to see more of our nominees' comments and learn the results.

Dear readers, welcome to 2009. The year just ended was a difficult one, for the legal profession and for the country as a whole. Let's hope the new year brings better news.

But will it? Take our reader poll below, and offer your specific predictions about 2009 in the comments.

If you'd like to help Above the Law get the year started on the right foot, please do us the honor of voting for us in the ABA Journal's Blawg 100 contest. Voting ends tomorrow, so this will be the last time we'll bother you with a plug. To vote, click here.

Happy New Year!

As we savor the final hours of 2008, it's time to look back at some of our favorite people this year: the commenters.

In today's ATL / Lateral Link survey, it's time for you to pick the 2008 ATL Commenter of the Year.

Your nominees for Commenter of the Year, and select comments explaining why, are as follows:

1. Count Layoffula

One! One Reason!

six. six times he has made me laugh aloud

Turns the frightening inevitability of layoffs into a moment for comedy; not easy to do. Very clever idea, keeps character, funny as hell. Wildly popular on this board. Hands down the Commenter of the Year.

2. Douche Patrol

He's the only commenter that gives a sense of order to the otherwise chaotic commentary. His commentary is also always dead-on.

3. FRAT STUD

Because guys in my high school used to vote for FRAT STUD all the time. It was no big deal.

4. Fraternity Lothario

Hilarious, dry, terrific writer. Captures both the essence of ridiculous, in-joke ATL commenting while bringing genuine criticism to the issue of every post. As long as you give the award to the guy who burned up the comments all spring, then left (on a sailing trip? to become a pirate?) this summer with a formal farewell, you would be giving the award to a commenter whose work is Oscar-worthy.

Although his posts have been less frequent, no one is more eloquent (e.g. ATL EIC) while comically germane.

5. Glass Cock

avatar is amusing, and attitude rocks

6. Guest

The most insightful and informed comments are consistently made by Guest. Everything else is trash.

Most comments, most firsts, most everything. Guest rocks.

7. Jack Bauer

He's funny without being offensive or annoying. In the words of the ATL editor "consistently brilliant." Finally, do you think that it's a coincidence that when the legal industry is facing it's darkest hour, Jack is back?

I don't know any other person who would take the LSATs, apply and go to law school, purely to infiltrate BIGLAW to get information leading to the takedown of a suspected traitor to this nation.

8. Nervous T-10 1L

Personifies the economic doom and fear among law students. Also kinda funny.

he's the post-modern Loyola 2L of the apocolypse

9. Commenter 83 in the interview horror stories thread.

"Where I remain to this day." Priceless!

Technically, commenter 83 was actually "Guest," but it wouldn't be an official ATL reader poll if we didn't give Guest an opportunity to comment about the unfairness of the poll. Also, that comment really was . . . something.

Having a hard time deciding? It's no big deal. We've selected some of the choicer comments from our candidates to help you decide.

Unfortunately, we really couldn't put some of them above the fold. Some are pretty crude, and Glass Cock's is far too long. [Ed Note: That's what she said.]

So, keep reading after the jump to see some of the nominees' exemplary comments, and then cast your vote.

In Monday's ATL / Lateral Link survey, we asked you to cast your vote for the 2008 ATL Lawyer of the Year.

More than three thousand ballots were cast, but there can be only one Lawyer of the Year.

Starting at the bottom, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich may not have hit the very lowest point in Chicago political history, but he did manage to get the lowest tally in our vote, with only 96 supporters.

Harvard Law Avenger Phil Telfeyan was a close second-to-last in your esteem, with a mere 110 votes.

Judge Halverson rounded out the bottom three at 167 votes.

That makes THREE! THREE! THREE candidates who did worse than Count Layoffula! HA! HA! HA! (He received a total of 233 votes.)

Listen dude, you really want the Spitzer? Apparently not. The prosecutor-turned-commentator came up only average in our slate of nominees, with 288 votes.

Nervous T-10 1L may not have found a job this year, but he touched the hearts of 428 voters, landing him in the Final Four.

Marc Dreier -- if that's his real name -- swindled up 485 ballots, more votes than disgraced governors Eliot Spitzer and Rod Blagojevich combined. Way to rock the scandal vote, sir. You're the Second Runner-Up for the 2008 ATL Lawyer of the Year.

That leaves us with the final two. Will last year's runner-up, President-elect Barack Obama, finally be Number That One? Or will The Anonymous Laid-Off Big Firm Attorney finally get something to soothe his pain? (Elie won't share his pot.)

Find out who will be crowned the 2008 ATL Lawyer of the Year, after the jump.

In last week's ATL / Lateral Link survey, we asked you to submit your nominations for ATL's 2008 Lawyer and Commenter of the Year.

Today, you get to vote for the Lawyer of the Year.

There were almost as many nominees as layoffs this year, so we narrowed it down to the top nine.

In fact, one of the nominees used to be known as Client 9. Another has been referred to as That One. And yet another just likes numbers.

Your nominees for the 2008 ATL Lawyer of the Year, and select comments explaining why, are as follows:

1. Nervous T-10 1L

Personifies the economic doom and fear among law students.

If he doesn't win something, he might kill himself.

2. Eliot Spitzer

He showed us that lawyers can have it all -- power, fame, beautiful women -- until it all comes crashing down. Kind of a metaphor for biglaw.

3. The Anonymous Laid-Off Big Firm Attorney

Because one month after being told "here are the things we need to do to make sure you look good for partnership in the next two years and here's a 10% raise" I was told that my performance was subpar and I had no future at the firm.

4. Rod Blagojevich

He paid me a pretty penny to nominate him.

5. Count Layoffula

One! One Reason!

6. Marc Dreier

Having the stones to defraud corporations with the sale of false securities -- in their own buildings.

He's accomplished so much in so little time. He single-handedly obliterated his own firm, his employees' futures (by rendering them unemployed at the single worst possible time, economically speaking), and likely a significant chunk of his future liberty. Not to mention he dated Maxim models.

7. Judge Halverson

Because you don't have an "ATL Judge of the Year"

8. Phil Telfeyan (a/k/a The Harvard Law Avenger)

Generating by far the most controversy; protesting PJ day in high school or whatever, and failing to fully walk around a statue he prominently cites in a lr article.

9. Barack Obama

Duh.

So, who should win? Cast your vote below.

Note: when you cast your vote, you'll get a sneak peek at some of the comments from this year's ATL Commenter of the Year nominees.

Update: This survey is now closed. Click here for the results (and click here to read some comments from the Commenter of the Year nominees).

--
Justin Bernold is a Director at Lateral Link, the sponsor of this survey.

Now that we're nearing the end of the year, it's a good time to put things in perspective.

While recent posts have focused on what Elie calls "the four hoursemen of the economic crisis" (layoffs, salary freezes, low bonuses, and dissolution), we should always remember that there's crushing debt, too. ATL can also be a place for hope.

Just last year, a "skinny kid with a funny name" was nominated for ATL Lawyer of the Year . . . and lost to an ATL commenter-prophet with a not-so-funny view of his career prospects.

In honor of that improbable victory by Loyola 2L, today's ATL / Lateral Link survey calls for nominations for this year's Lawyer of the Year.

Last year, your nominees included luminaries like Barack Obama (because "I mean, did you see the Obama Girl videos?"), Hillary Clinton ("She's fabulous."), Alberto Gonzales, ("Exemplifies why lawyers are so mistrusted in this country."), Aaron Charney, ("For both the attention focused, success of action, and for the visibility [he] brought to the secondary issue of partner/associate relations (but not those kinds of relations)."), and, of course, the winner, Loyola 2L ("He's generated the most thoughtful discussion of law school. That, and perhaps the publicity will help him get a job.").

Submit your nominations for this year's Lawyer of the Year below.

Also, in honor of Loyola 2L's victory, we're adding a bonus question (which may be the only bonus some of you get this year): we're accepting nominations for the ATL Commenter of the Year, so you can tell us who's "First!" in your heart.

Of course, even though there's a spot for you to nominate a Commenter of the Year, you can also still feel free to nominate a commenter for Lawyer of the Year, too. Or, as one commenter in particular might put it, there are . . .

TWO! TWO PLACES TO NOMINATE COUNT LAYOFFULA!!! AH AH AH!!!!!

--
Justin Bernold is a Director at Lateral Link, the sponsor of this survey.