According to IAALS’ Foundations for Practice project, legal employers and current practitioners believe that, to be successful, new attorneys right out of law school must do much more than simply refine their legal skills—they must also possess the professional competencies and characteristics that will allow them to be thrive in today’s demanding market. Today, the question remains: How can law schools adapt to meet the needs of the modern legal profession?

Judges and attorneys from across the country point to dispositive motions as a critical area for reform. Today, IAALS announces the release of a new report, Efficiency in Motion: Recommendations for Improving Dispositive Motions Practice in State and Federal Courts, calling for a new paradigm for motion practice in the United States. The report is the culmination of nearly three years of research, surveys, and expert input into the opportunities for improvement and innovation.

The percentage of self-represented litigants in many state family courts is substantial. According to a new post by the National Self-Represented Litigants Project (NSRLP), these self-represented parties often feel like outsiders in a court system that appears to them as a private club.

For the fifth year in a row, the National Center for State Courts has conducted a comprehensive public opinion survey to gauge the level of public trust and confidence in the state courts. The State of the State Courts survey provides an important window into public views of our court system, including comparisons across past surveys and insights into key issues for the future of our state courts including self-representation and online dispute resolution.

Employers, particularly those in large firms, have been candid about their hiring preferences, which lean toward academic excellence. The legal profession is rampant with biases in favor of academic excellence. However, as it turns out, the best and the brightest might not be all they’re cracked up to be.

Dick Holme has been an invaluable resource at IAALS over the years. With his pioneering insights, steadfast dedication, and hard work, Dick has not only helped shape IAALS, but the legal system as well. We thank him for his continued thought leadership and philanthropic commitment to IAALS.

The National Center for State Courts recently released an “explainer video” for courts to use as a resource when educating the public about the role of our state courts. The video looks back at the establishment of the judicial branch and the vision of our founders—of a court system that makes decisions based on law not public opinion, that is fair and impartial, that is accountable to the law and the Constitution, and open to people.

Over the past two years, IAALS has been collaborating with the National Center for State Courts (NCSC) on a three-year project to support the modernization and transformation of civil litigation in our state courts. In October we hosted our final meeting for the Midwest Region in Kansas City, Missouri, where over 40 states and territories attended.

As a former president of the ACTL and one of our very first board members, Ozzie has been an invaluable resource at IAALS, and his steadfast dedication to the organization has been critical to its success. We thank him for over a decade of hard work at IAALS and his continued support of our mission.

Many courts across the country struggle with overburdened staff and inefficient processes. However, those within the judiciary are now turning to technology to make their courts more efficient and narrow the equal justice gap.

At IAALS, much of our work centers around increasing access to civil justice—especially for those who are navigating our legal system without the assistance of a lawyer. As more and more litigants represent themselves, by choice or necessity, the need for a broader infrastructure to support them is essential, both inside and outside the court. IAALS’ Court Compass project is leading the charge in that arena.

State courts, where 95 percent of all cases are filed, are powerful. Their decisions can have profound effects on our rights and our lives—from whether Massachusetts officials can detain people based on a request from federal immigration authorities to whether a Michigan voter-initiated redistricting proposal could appear on the ballot.