In 2006, IAALS opened its doors in a small adjunct office on campus at the University of Denver. With little more than a folding table and chairs, we embarked on a journey to improve the civil justice system. Today, we are a vibrant, national research center, and more committed than ever to continuous improvement of the civil justice system. That is why we decided to launch IAALS Online. We believe it will allow us to harness the power of national conversations to identify and improve solutions for a stronger system.

Chief Justice Ruth V. McGregor (Ret.) served on the Arizona Supreme Court from February 1998 until June 30, 2009. She was the Court's Chief Justice from June 2005 until her retirement. As we launch IAALS Online, she joins three other former Chief Justices in the conversation about IAALS and its initiatives. "This election season will give all of us an opportunity to think about how much – or how little – we know about our state supreme court justices. Most of you can name the candidates for President, for Congress, and for your Governor. But do you know how your state supreme court justices are selected and whether any judicial candidates will appear on the November ballot in your state?"

Dean John T. Broderick, Jr., is the Dean of the University of New Hampshire School of Law. Previously, he was Chief Justice of the New Hampshire Supreme Court since 2004. Prior to his installation as Chief Justice, he had served as an Associate Justice since 1995. As we launch IAALS Online, he joins three other former Chief Justices in the conversation about IAALS and its initiatives by discussing the work of our Rule One Initiative. "The civil justice system is in danger of becoming irrelevant – both to you and to me as citizens, and even to corporations and other business entities. None of us can afford it. It costs too much, takes too long, and is too uncertain."

Justice Paul J. De Muniz was elected to the Oregon Supreme Court in 2000 and served as the court's Chief Justice and administrative head of the Oregon Judicial Department from January 2006 to May 2012. As we launch IAALS Online, he joins three other former Chief Justices in the conversation about IAALS and its initiatives by discussing the work of our Honoring Families Initiative. "Like with other parts of our court systems, now is the time to ask hard questions about the structure, operation, tradition, and culture of our family courts. We could begin by asking whether our traditional adversarial model actually meets the needs of divorcing and separating families. Is it not time to reengineer our family courts in ways that are less adversarial, that encourage continued parental involvement with their children, and that provide for alternative forums and processes outside the court system for resolving parenting issues in a more consensual manner?"

Justice Christine Durham has been on the Utah Supreme Court since 1982, and served as Chief Justice from 2002 to 2012. As we launch IAALS Online, she joins three other former Chief Justices in the conversation about IAALS and its initiatives by discussing the work of our Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers Initiative. "There are widespread conversations occurring about the future of lawyers and law schools. Current phenomena include dramatic decreases in legal sector jobs and a restructuring of the legal market that appears to be extremely durable. Changes in the way legal services are delivered are occurring rapidly, with on-line forms and guidance being increasingly utilized by consumers. Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers is a project grounded in the faith that “knowledge, practice and professionalism” will remain the touchstone for the role of lawyers in a future that is likely to look much different from the past."

This November, in addition to executive and legislative candidates, Colorado voters will be deciding whether or not to retain Colorado judges. Under Colorado’s system for selecting and retaining judges, all judges who will appear on the ballot must undergo a performance evaluation, the results of which are provided to the public as a tool for casting an informed retention vote. A website—www.knowyourjudge.com—is helping voters locate this information for the judges who will appear on their ballot.

The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register. The ITC's proposed rules apply to 337 investigations, which involve allegations that a competitor is importing patent-infringing goods. The proposed rules closely follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and seek to "make patent-infringement disputes more affordable by placing limitations on electronic discovery."

Governor Brownback’s chief counsel is among 21 applicants for a court of appeals vacancy. After screening and interviewing the applicants, the nominating commission will identify three candidates from which the governor must choose.

Recent polling indicates that the chief justice race between Judge Robert Vance Jr. and Roy Moore is a dead heat, a somewhat surprising turn of events given that Vance did not enter the race as the Democratic candidate until September. Since then, Vance has raised $500,000 and received endorsements from two prominent Alabama Republicans.

Following public interviews of 18 applicants and private deliberations, the appellate judicial commission selected three nominees for possible appointment to the supreme court vacancy created by Justice Ray Price’s retirement. Three interviewees were women and one was a minority, with six from outside metropolitan areas. Governor Nixon must make the appointment within 60 days.

Supporters of Amendment 3, which would alter the composition of the appellate judicial commission and require the commission to identify 4 (rather then 3) nominees for each vacancy, announced that they will not campaign for the amendment’s passage.

A radio ad funded by the American Justice Partnership highlights “eyebrow-raising” real estate transactions by a sitting justice who is not running for reelection, and a mailing from the Michigan Republican Party suggests that the Democratic supreme court candidates do not care about the potential mortgage fraud.