In this Issue

Courts & Judiciary

Judicial Courage, Judicial Heroes, and the Civil Rights Movement

When we hear the names of iconic judges, such as Judge Minor Wisdom or Judge Elbert Tuttle, our minds jump to thoughts of greatness, admiration, and courage. During the 1950s through the 1970s, a critical period of the civil rights movement, a handful of judges courageously sided with equal justice and the rule of law over racist customs and cultural norms. Panelist, Judge Nathaniel R. Jones, Judge Myron H. Thompson, and Anna M. Manasco, Ph.D., J.D., of Bradley, Arant, Boult, Cummings, LLP, led by moderator Judge Jill A. Pryor, provided insight into the life and legacy of judicial heroes in the civil rights movement.

Courts & Judiciary

You Know What Really Gets My Goat...?

You know they do it privately. Judges talk to other judges, complaining about clueless lawyers. Lawyers can’t wait to gripe to their colleagues about the grumpy judges they’re forced to endure. But these gossip sessions occur in confidence. On Friday, November 9, 2018, AJEI pulled back the curtain on all this fussin’ in a breakout session entitled, “The No-Contempt Zone: Judges and Practitioners Share What Each Wishes the Other Knew.”

Big Data & Cloud Computing

Artificial Intelligence Invades Appellate Practice: The Here, The Near, and The Oh My Dear

What is artificial intelligence and what do lawyers and judges need to know about it? The legal profession has already started to adopt new AI-based systems for uses such as legal research, document review, contract analysis, and outcome prediction. Those are the “here” and “near” of AI in law. As with many new technologies, AI has been overhyped, creating false expectations and fears that legal skills, human judgment, experience, and interpersonal skills will someday become outdated.

Courts & Judiciary

Is Constitutional Law, Law?

Constitutional interpretation is one of the most high-profile aspects of the Court’s docket, at least in terms of news cycles and public opinion at large. The Court’s power to interpret our Constitution is critical to keeping the faith in our governing system alive. And with an ever-increasing number of self-proclaimed “textualists” on the bench, our Court’s interpretation of the Constitution is increasingly constrained by text, history, and precedent. Or is it?