In September 2012, 21 law schools sent representatives to Educating Tomorrow’s Lawyers’ first conference, which sought collaboration among schools to identify best practices for forming professional identity, encouraged schools to share examples of programs and curricula that support professional development, and fostered new ideas and approaches that representatives could take back to their schools. Out of this meeting comes the Report on the 2012 Conference.

The American Bar Association's Task Force on the Future of Legal Education has been collecting comments from individuals and organizations since late last year. Educating Tomorrow's Lawyers submitted a comment focused on aligning legal education with the needs of an evolving profession, and made six recommendations.

Federal public defender Ray Moore was one of 11 nominees voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 14. If the timetable proceeds as it has with other nominees, the full Senate would vote on Moore’s nomination in April or May, though an informal Senate agreement regarding the time allowed for filibustering may speed up the overall confirmation process.

Inspired by the spirit of a holiday devoted to love, the New York Times’ Room for Debate editorial board hosted a lively discussion that asks: “Should a divorce be more difficult to obtain? Or is the process arduous enough already?" Beverly Willett, a writer, lawyer, and co-chair of the Coalition for Divorce objects to the “me-centered approach” that she claims no-fault divorce laws have fostered. She is countered by Vicki Larson, a journalist who writes about marriage and divorce.

The Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Judicial Evaluation Commission has posted the first of its endorsements of judicial candidates, in preparation for the May 21 primary election. The Bar’s review process consists of a questionnaire on the candidate’s legal background, an investigation by a three-member panel, and an interview with the full commission, after which the candidate is notified of the Bar’s decision.

A senate panel approved a bill that would expand the state’s seven-member judicial nominating commission, adding two commissioners who would be appointed by the leaders of each chamber. Currently, the judicial conference appoints two trial court judges, the state bar president appoints three lawyers, and the governor appoints two non-lawyers to serve on the commission.

The Minnesota Supreme Court has adopted amendments to its Rules of Civil Procedure and General Rules of Practice that are aimed at “facilitating more cost effective and efficient civil case processing.” The amendments, which take effect July 1, 2013, adopt many of the recommendations of the Civil Justice Reform Task Force.

Only three of twelve Republicans on the senate judiciary committee voted with their Democratic colleagues to advance New York Governor Andrew Cuomo's recent nominee to the state court of appeals, but they did so "without recommendation." Some critics of CUNY law professor Jenny Rivera question the breadth of her legal experience.

Two Republican lawmakers proposed a bill that would make judicial elections partisan again. Democrats led the charge to make them nonpartisan a decade ago, but at least in the 2012 appellate court elections, the party affiliation of the candidates was clear.

The Civil Rules Advisory Committee has proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to address proportionality, preservation, and spoliation problems associated with today's swiftly evolving technology. Robert D. Owen outlines the events leading to the current amendments (including IAALS’ and the ACTL Task Force on Discovery’s 2009 Final Report), the extensive work of the Committee over the last several years, and the specific rule changes under consideration.

In E-Discovery: The Views from the Trenches, the National Law Journal surveyed litigators and vendors to get their perspectives on the top developments in e-discovery over the past year. A top response—predictive coding. But proportionality made a showing as well.

As state legislatures around the country kick off their 2013 sessions, lawmakers in at least four states—Kansas, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee—are poised to make changes to the process for selecting their states’ judges.