Expert Opinions

Professional ethics rules have long prevented judges from speaking about their rulings and opinions. However, beginning next month, California state judges will be able to comment directly on pending cases—their own or those of a judicial colleague—in connection with a judicial election or recall campaign.

My recent experience with the civil justice system—even pre-COVID-19—has been frustrating, to say the least. Through it all, though, my journey through the system has given me a more personal perspective on the importance of our work at IAALS and helping the real users of our system—like me—have better and more efficient access to justice.

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.

Law Day 2020 celebrates the centennial of the transformative amendment that gave women the right to vote. As we recognize this moment in our country's history, we also remember that the 19th Amendment has not translated to broader gender equality—and that our justice system, too, is not immune to claims of systemic inequality and bias.

This year, the ABA marks Law Day 2020 with the theme of “Your Voice, Your Vote, Our Democracy,” a celebration of the centennial of the passage of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We look to the women's suffrage movement for inspiration and to remind us that creating impact and change takes time.

The COVID-19 pandemic poses unique challenges to lawyers and law students alike. For many students enrolled in live-client clinics, the challenges of meeting their clients' needs in a transitional environment are particularly demanding. Yet these law students in clinical programs have a unique opportunity to rise to the occasion.

Courts, judges, and lawyers have demonstrated a remarkable ability to adapt to a remote and technology-driven version of our justice system in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These changes have fundamentally altered the way the system operates and call for a renewed commitment to civility and collegiality across the legal profession.

Administering justice in the time of COVID-19 has taken on a whole new direction in a rural municipal court in Laramie, Wyoming. After the governor declared a state of emergency, we developed a plan to temporarily delay any in-court personal appearances and began utilizing videoconferencing to facilitate necessary court functions.

Imagine a legal sector neatly divided into two groups: the Rule Makers and the Risk Takers. With evidence piling up that the legal market is not working for ordinary citizens, the Rule Makers come together to evaluate possible changes. After the new rules are enacted, the burden shifts to the Risk Takers to build out workable solutions.

In January 2019, IAALS published recommendations for improving dispositive motions practice in state and federal courts, calling for a new paradigm for motion practice in the United States. Now, judges around the country are answering the call.

On Thursday, March 12, the State Bar of California Trustees voted to postpone passing the motion to explore the development of a regulatory sandbox to May. In my eyes, every day, hour, or minute of delay leads to bad legal outcomes for Californians. Our legal system is in crisis. Now, as a community, we have to turn our kinetic access-to-justice energy into focused action.

From my perspective as the director of a law school innovation lab, legal education is disengaged from the regulatory reform effort: only a handful of legal academics have chimed in on regulatory reform or been involved in task force efforts. But legal education should join the conversation and prepare for the changes ahead, for several reasons.