Perhaps the best way to introduce Bad Legal LLP to the uninitiated is to reference Poe’s Law.
For several years now, @BadLegalLLP has offered some of the most devastatingly funny, and often most painfully incisive satirical commentary on different aspects of the legal profession. Always delivered in a matter-of-fact way that even at its most extreme, can trigger that uncomfortable pang of recognition among its core audience. (well, maybe not – at least I hope not – the frequent sex dungeon references).
A recent tweet sharing the full platform of Managing Partner Arthur P. Bad, Jr.’s Law Society of Ontario 2019 Bencher Election campaign is no exception:
Now, I’m no way suggesting that Arthur’s platform will find favour with voters or that other candidates who have contributed their profiles to this site will find in him common cause and a fellow traveler. However, I was sorely tempted to quietly slip this profile in among the candidates and the specific statements among the corresponding issues pages to put Poe’s Law to the test.
While you won’t find Arthur’s “13-point plan to Maintain the Status Quo” explicitly reflected in candidate profiles and position statements, Twitter debate during this election season has veered awfully close to a few of them and to the core strategic vision of the “Bad” platform: “There are no benchers in their first 10 years of call. Let’s keep it that way.”
Here’s a few examples that feel a little too close to reality for comfort, with the difference being more in the brazenness of the statement than the sentiment:
- Reopen the LSO name debate
- Raise fees to pay to for larger and more elaborate billboards
- Make Articling Great Again
- Rename paralegals as “pseudo-legals”
- Oppose ABS because it detracts from the selflessness of our profession
- Fewer Canadian wines in the Osgoode Hall Restaurant
I guess I’ll close by encouraging people to follow @BadLegalLLP on twitter, to examine the platforms of the actual candidates, and to be mindful that consdering the role of the the Law Society is to regulate the legal profession in the public interest (and not in the interests of lawyers), the Bad and Good platforms should be very different.