7300 research outputs found
Sort by
Moore Questions, Some Answers: Fixing the Personal Tax System Despite Constitutional Constraints
No full textMoore v United States was expected to rule on the constitutional necessity of the tax-law realization requirement originating from Eisner v Macomber, a potential impediment to progressive tax reform efforts aimed at shutting down the planning techniques of Buy Borrow Die. The various opinions in Moore, however, provided no definitive answer to this core question, instead leaving many more questions. Amid the lingering uncertainty, we argue that various responses to the problem of wealthy Americans’ not needing to pay any taxes remain possible after Moore. An incremental, “mix-and-match” approach to progressive tax reform may best suit the problem and the times
The Art of AI Prompting in Law and Dispute Resolution Practice
No full textThis short article offers a practical guide for using AI tools to improve the judgment and efficiency of lawyers, mediators, and arbitrators. It cites ABA Ethics Opinion 512, which describes lawyers’ ethical duty of technological competence under the ABA Model Rules.
The article encourages practitioners to begin by selecting AI tools appropriate to their tasks such as general-purpose platforms or specialized tools listed in the article. It explains how to write effective prompts, use follow-up questions to refine outputs, and apply professional judgment when reviewing results. It includes a list of suggested follow-up prompts.
Getting useful results from AI tools requires similar skills used in legal and dispute resolution work – skills that people can improve with practice. The article includes numerous examples of AI prompts that can be used throughout the life of a case, from preparation to post-session reflection.
It cautions that AI tools can produce inaccurate, misleading, or fabricated content, and urges users to exercise human oversight and to independently verify results
Winter Is Coming: What States Should Do Now, Part I
No full textThis Article addresses the unprecedented fiscal challenges facing state governments as federal policy shifts threaten to create a perfect storm of revenue losses and increased service demands. As states confront potential federal cuts to essential services like Medicaid, reduced tax enforcement capacity, and possible tariff-driven economic disruption, we argue that piecemeal responses will prove insufficient.
We propose a seven-step framework for state fiscal resilience: (1) pausing automatic conformity to federal tax changes to preserve revenue bases; (2) enhancing state tax enforcement capacity by hiring federal personnel as the IRS sheds expertise; (3) maintaining and expanding taxpayer service innovations like direct filing programs; (4) protecting research and educational infrastructure as critical long-term investments; (5) implementing progressive tax reforms to counter regressive federal changes; (6) modernizing consumption tax structures by expanding sales tax bases to services and digital products; and (7) rethinking fundamental fiscal architecture, including wealth taxation and borrowing constraints.
The Article emphasizes that these strategies must work in concert rather than isolation. For example, increasing tax rates without enhanced enforcement capacity may prove ineffective, while protecting revenue bases requires both legislative and administrative approaches. Similarly, states that fail to maintain their research and educational infrastructure may face long-term economic disadvantages that undermine future revenue potential.
Our analysis demonstrates why states cannot simply wait for federal policy reversals or rely on traditional fiscal adjustment mechanisms. Instead, proactive and coordinated state action is essential to maintain vital public services and economic competitiveness during this period of federal retrenchment. This comprehensive approach offers states a pathway to navigate fiscal challenges while preserving their capacity to serve residents and compete economically
Million-Dollar Mysteries: Recent Complex Patent Cases Lost to Rule 36
No full textThis article examines the Federal Circuit\u27s continued use of Rule 36 summary affirmances to dispose of complex patent cases without written opinions. Through analysis of eight recent Rule 36 cases decided in early 2025, the author demonstrates that sophisticated legal issues involving millions of dollars are being summarily affirmed despite presenting novel and important questions of patent law. The cases discussed involve design patent evidentiary standards, jury trial rights for hybrid legal-equitable claims, analogous art determinations, claim construction, written description requirements, and PTAB procedural issues. The author argues that while the court may be avoiding difficult cases with complex factual records, particularly in IPR appeals, this practice deprives the patent community of valuable precedent, reduces transparency in judicial decision-making, and potentially allows judges to evade the disciplined analysis that writing opinions requires. The article suggests that the court\u27s overuse of Rule 36 affirmances conflicts with its fundamental duty to explain and develop patent law, regardless of whether the ultimate outcomes are correct
How Can You Turn Adversarial Attorneys into Quasi-Mediators?
No full textThis article grows out of an educational program sponsored by the St. Louis chapter of the Association of Attorney-Mediators, which functioned as a focus group. It describes mediators’ experiences with attorneys in mediation who were cooperative and adversarial.
It describes things that mediators can do to make adversarial attorneys behave as “quasi-mediators.” Attorneys acting as quasi-mediators help their clients realistically understand the other side’s perspectives. The attorneys also promote their clients’ interests by enlisting the mediators’ help and encouraging the other side to adjust their positions. Attorneys who sometimes act as quasi-mediators tailor their techniques to their clients’ preferences and the other side’s approach. If the other side is acting badly and taking unreasonable positions, these attorneys vigorously advocate their clients’ interests. But whenever appropriate, they look for opportunities to reach reasonable agreements, and they use mediation techniques to move the process in that direction. They use mediation techniques, but they aren’t neutral or subject to rules governing mediators.
The article includes appendixes with lists dos and don’ts for attorneys to act as quasi-mediators and topics that mediators can discuss with attorneys to promote cooperation
Responsible Realism About Artificial Intelligence: How AI is Shaping Legal and Dispute Resolution Practice, Education, and Scholarship
No full textThis article synthesizes the views of legal scholars examining how generative artificial intelligence (AI) is affecting legal and dispute resolution practice, education, and scholarship. They share a perspective of responsible realism – recognizing both the promise and the perils of AI. It is already reshaping how lawyers, neutrals, educators, students, and scholars work – and its influence will only grow.The scholars identify clear benefits: broader access, greater efficiency, and new support for professional learning. They also warn of serious risks, including bias, deskilling, and erosion of judgment. Avoiding both hype and panic, they analyze developments, offer realistic strategies, and propose policies to promote responsible use and curb misuse.This article distills their main insights into a concise and usable framework. It highlights shared themes, contrasting emphases, and practical takeaways for lawyers, neutrals, educators, students, and institutions
Teaching with AI - and Teaching Students to Use It Well
No full textThis article argues that the rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into legal practice creates an opportunity-and need-for legal educators to rethink and improve their courses. While some faculty fear that AI will erode students\u27 skills or encourage academic dishonesty, thoughtful use of AI tools in legal education actually can promote deeper learning, improve student writing, and reveal how students actually think. The article distinguishes between summative and formative assessment and explains how AI can produce meaningful formative feedback. It offers specific examples of AI-based assignments that can help students build core professional skills, and it highlights the importance of teaching students to use AI tools effectively and responsibly. While acknowledging that AI is not appropriate for every course or every student, the article encourages faculty to match assignments to students\u27 developmental stages and use AI to help achieve important learning goals
Toward a Politically Neutral Approach to K-12 Pedagogy
No full textProfessors Linda McClain and James Fleming have written an intellectually stimulating book manuscript, “What Shall Be Orthodox” in Polarized Times? It is a privilege to have been afforded access to an early iteration of the book and an opportunity to share our thoughts about it. We (with “we” and its related “our” and “us” denoting Cameron and John) were inspired by Professors McClain and Fleming to reflect about the relationship between pedagogy and the Constitution
The Straw that Broke the Camel’s Back: How Expanding the Statute of Limitations for Pre-Enforcement Challenges Filed Under the APA Could Upset the Administrative System
No full textEveryone has bad days. But certain days are the worst. The days where everything seems to go wrong. You set the alarm for 6:00 p.m., not 6:00 a.m. You didn’t set the coffee pot, and the café’s line was too long, so you walk into work with a severe lack of caffeine. Your project manager asks you a question you know you answered last week. That annoying co-worker talks over you in a meeting, the chips get stuck in a vending machine, and your rush hour commute takes forty-five minutes longer than expected. Finally, something happens that makes you snap. Maybe you can’t unlock your door. Whatever it is, it would not ordinarily be the type of thing that warrants the dramatic response you inevitably give. You scream, you yell, perhaps you even cry out of frustration. Everyone unfortunate enough to be caught in your wake has the same idea: “What’s with the melodrama? It’s not a big deal.” But you understand this nuisance—though seemingly minor—was the straw that broke the camel’s back
Legislative Update
Full text linkThe Legislative Update tracks legislation related to alternate dispute resolution that has been proposed and passed in state legislatures nationwide. With guidance from the Associate Editor-in-Chief, Associate Members of the Journal of Dispute Resolution wrote this update. This update includes articles focusing on specific bills and trends across legislation from various states that the authors found most interesting and impactful