Expert Opinions

Insights from A Blueprint for Judicial Innovation lay out how judges can be catalysts for change in their courts.

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."

HB 3380 would establish a judicial performance evaluation program for Oklahoma’s appellate and trial judges, and is remarkably similar to processes that already operate successfully in seven states where judges appear on the ballot, as they do in Oklahoma. The contemplated JPE program in Oklahoma is objective, broad-based, and apolitical, and an improvement on existing processes.

Just a week ago, the long awaited amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect. Of the amendments, the most significant—and controversial—changes are to Rule 26, which specifically incorporates proportionality into the scope of discovery.

On June 15, 2015, members of the American Bar Association joined with their British counterparts on a water meadow on the banks of the Thames at Runnymede, county of Surrey, England, directly under the flight path of Heathrow Airport. This event culminated the celebration of the anniversary of perhaps the seminal document on the rule of law: Magna Carta. I had the privilege of not only attending the 800th Anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta, but also of chairing the ABA’s London Programs leading up to the actual anniversary. After two years of planning, the celebration exceeded all expectations, with the Her Majesty the Queen, the Her Royal Highness the Princess Royal, other members of the royal family, the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the U.S. Attorney General in attendance.

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.

Last year, IAALS surveyed members of the American Board of Trial Advocates about their trust and confidence in the legal system and factors that influence their perspectives. A substantial majority of respondents reported high levels of confidence in both the state and federal court systems, but others gave us reasons for their declining confidence.

IAALS and HiiL have released the results of our US Justice Needs study, providing data on the justice problems Americans experience and the ways they seek to resolve them. Now that we know what people need help with most, we can begin to chart a new path forward to improve our justice system nationwide.

On Constitution Day, when the tendency is to wax poetic regarding the historic significance of our Constitution, we must be reminded of this living framework and its provision of both rights and responsibilities. We all have a role in ensuring the continued strength of our democracy.

Last month's ETL conference, entitled “The Development of Professional Identity in Legal Education,” brought together teams from its consortium schools, its ETL fellows, and many other legal education reform advocates. Some day in the not-too-distant future, prospective law students will seek out law schools and individual professors who have led, and will continue to lead, these important reform efforts – like those affiliated with ETL. We must facilitate the path to that day.

For the second year in a row, the U.S. News and World Report's 2015 law school rankings have taken advantage of the rich employment data now made public by the American Bar Association. But as the Economist noted last week, the rankings have not yet made use of an interesting piece of data the ABA has published: whether student jobs reported by schools were funded by law schools.

In April, there will be a vacancy on the U.S. District Court for Colorado due to the impending retirement of Judge Robert Blackburn. As with all Article III judgeships, the President will nominate someone to fill the seat, and that person must then be confirmed by a majority of the Senate—no small task in the final year of President Obama’s second term and with divided government.

On September 17, 1787, the Framers signed the United States Constitution. The day is observed by some lawyer and judge groups but, unfortunately, largely goes unnoticed by the rest of the population. Our Constitution is masterful, and deserves to be celebrated by all of us.

In the past several years, design thinking has gained traction in the legal field as a method for involving litigants and other stakeholders in developing improvements to the legal system. IAALS has taken design thinking one step further in applying a structured qualitative research approach to the process.

Unauthorized practice of law rules grant lawyers a monopoly on providing legal advice and prevent “nonlawyers” from providing any meaningful legal assistance. This mindset codified in the UPL rules, along with our country’s staggering racial wealth gap, have a chilling effect on Black Americans' access to the legal system.

Lawmakers in California recently spoke out against the state bar's exploration of regulatory reform as a means to address the access-to-justice crisis. However, the need for efficient and affordable legal services is growing exponentially—and data suggests that legal services innovation could a key part of the solution.

In the final days of North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue's term, she will be filling the supreme court vacancy created by the unanticipated retirement of Justice Patricia Timmons-Goodson. Given the short time frame in which the appointment must be made, the governor has decided to forego use of the judicial nominating commission and make a direct appointment. As a necessary step, she entered Executive Order 137, “temporarily modifying” the selection process for all vacancies that may arise before she leaves office. We understand the time constraints but lament her decision.

In the world of choosing law schools, we have generic rankings and recommendations—including US News & World Report, and a number of others that have popped up over the years—which can provide a certain value, but they hardly give the whole picture. Last year, we launched Law Jobs: By the Numbers, an employment calculator that allows you to review school employment numbers based on the criteria you care about most—and with the new 2013 ABA employment numbers, we've made some big upgrades.

Rebuilding justice. This is an awesome charge. And it is one that IAALS has embraced since its beginnings in 2006. IAALS was started as an attempt to remake the American legal system. While our system has many virtues, it is inefficient. It is unequal. Fundamentally, it is imperfect. But we are a country of laws, and the legal process is the thread that holds together our enviable conception of democracy. Therefore, the desire for a perfect system of justice is a natural outgrowth of that foundational goal of a more perfect union. But justice is more than systems. Justice is about people. Justice is about hopes and dreams and goals. Justice is about dignity. This is why the idea of rebuilding justice is so awesome, so ambitious, and so necessary.  

On October 5, 2016, I was honored to be a panelist at IAALS’ joint Law Firm Council and Business Leadership Network meeting. There were three panels at this plenary session: 1) a panel of corporate in-house counsel; 2) a panel of outside counsel; and 3) a panel of judges (from both the federal bench and the state bench).