ABA Journal Podcasts - Legal Talk Network

This Harvard Law prof thinks constitutional theory is a terrible way to pick a judge

What if we are asking the wrong questions when selecting American judges? Mark Tushnet thinks our current criteria might be off.“We should look for judges who are likely to display good judgment in their rulings … and we shouldn’t care whether they have a good theory about how to interpret the Constitution as a whole—and maybe we should worry a bit if they think they have such a theory,” the Harvard Law professor writes in his new book, Who Am I to Judge? Judicial Craft Versus Constitutional Theory.In looking at what qualities were shared by great Supreme Court justices, Tushnet identified five he thinks were of especial importance: Longevity and age Location in political time Prior experience in public life NOT A JUDGE (“I put this in capital letters because it’s common today to think that justices have to have been judges,” Tushnet wrote. He doesn’t see having a past judicial career as disqualifying, but points out that many great justices were not sitting judges when appointed.) Intellectual curiosity In this episode of The Modern Law Library, Tushnet and the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles discuss how he thinks people should be evaluated for judicial positions; his experience as a clerk for former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall; what makes a well-crafted opinion; and why he thinks any overarching theory about the Constitution will fall short.

'The Licensing Racket' takes aim at professional licensing in America

Should you need a license for that? For law professor and antitrust expert Rebecca Haw Allensworth, there are huge problems with professional licensing in America—and her solutions might not make anyone completely happy. In her new book, The Licensing Racket: How We Decide Who Is Allowed to Work, and Why It Goes Wrong, Allensworth takes a deep dive into the history and function of licensing in the United States. While licensing boards are put forth as a way to protect consumers, Allensworth says that in practice, their decisions can be arbitrary and their disciplinary functions flawed.In this episode of the Modern Law Library, Allensworth and the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles chat about a range of professions that currently require licenses, from hairdressing to law and medicine. While disciplinary procedures for lawyers are not open to the public, she was able to attend a number of proceedings for health care workers accused of wrongdoing, and what she found sometimes shocked her—and even shocked some of the people responsible for making those disciplinary decisions. She shares some of those stories in the episode.The Licensing Racket argues that licensing should be done away with for many professions. For those that remain, however, Allensworth believes much more must be done by government agencies rather than allowing professions to self-police themselves through volunteers and licensing boards

Should we expect new regulations on data privacy and consumer protection?

It’s a well-worn saying that the law always lags behind technology. It makes sense. We all remember the old song about how a bill becomes a law and how long the whole process can take. By the time you get to the verse about a president signing something into law, technology has either evolved into something even more cutting edge or become obsolete—replaced by a newer, shinier toy.

Former Watergate prosecutor and friends reflect on life in 'Legal Briefs'

For some people, retirement is an opportunity to kick back and finally relax. But for Roger M. Witten, it was a chance to finally tackle that book he'd been thinking about writing. With a little help from longtime friends and colleagues, Legal Briefs: The Ups and Downs of Life in the Law was born. Witten's aim was to reach a general audience and given them an idea about what a life in the law could look like outside the most well-known bounds of a criminal justice, Law & Order career. The result is a series of short, digestible anecdotes from 20 attorneys, talking about memorable cases, clients and conundrums they had. A reader could flip to any chapter in Legal Briefs and spend an enjoyable 5-10 minutes getting a snapshot from a contributor's career. Witten himself shares how he became an assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force in the 1970s. In this episode of the Modern Law Library, he tells host Lee Rawles about defending a wise guy client code-named Ted, who nicknamed Witten "Witless" and threw a party with a banner reading "Ted - 1, FBI - 0" when they reached a successful plea agreement. Many of the contributors to the book of essays were involved in government litigation and complex corporate matters. Witten himself was one of the foremost litigators handling Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases, and before his retirement was a senior litigation partner in WilmerHale's New York office. In this episode he also shares his perspective as a former Watergate prosecutor on current events within the federal government since the Trump Administration began, and recounts his experience with the late Sen. John McCain while defending campaign finance reforms.

What's the forecast for generative AI in 2025?

If last year was when generative artificial intelligence went mainstream, could this year be the one when it gets even bigger? Will we see more people, law firms, companies and government agencies adopt, use or integrate it into their day-to-day activities? Will we see more rules and regulations from states or the federal government regarding its use? What about law schools and generative AI? Will we see more start to teach it? And will lawyers finally learn more about what to do, or not to do, when it comes to using it?