NEW ARTICLE on @SSRN: "The Practice of Executive Constitutionalism," by me and @conorjclarke (forthcoming in @VirginiaLawRev). Check it out! (Link in next tweet to avoid being crushed by the @X algorithm).
@derektmuller@OrinKerr It presupposes that there will be a Chief Justice. I’m not sure that creates a constitutional obligation on Congress and the president to actually put someone in office.
@ARKloster Hard copies that are then archived numerous places digitally. I can still get law review articles published in the 1890s on JSTOR, Hein, other venues...
This seems entirely backwards to me. As it becomes clear that sites like SSRN aren't reliable long term repositories, journals—where articles have remained discoverable for over a century—become only more useful. Ad hoc hosting on law school websites can quickly become vaporware.
@danepps@ANNVYSHINSKY@SSRN@brianlfrye This is mass economics at work. We are headed to Elsevier/Lexis $$$ monopoly on the one hand, or pure pdf posting on X, but either way the prestige of law journals and student sham control are going to take a hit.
@OrinKerr Isn’t it also clear that Congress and the president could just decline to nominate and confirm any justices, leaving a permanently vacant court?
@ANNVYSHINSKY@SSRN@brianlfrye I doubt that a peer review journal would be OK with a piece that already has an irrevocable license on it that would let any other journal publish it as well without permission
FWIW, I’m hearing there may be a lot of confusion about what’s actually happening. I’ve asked my schools library to reach out to @SSRN for clarification.
@ASFleischman@Greg651 Unavailability is also required under the Confrontation Clause itself and I don’t know if that perfectly tracks FRE (Court hasn’t clearly told us).
@ProfArbel I think there are two questions here. One is “should student be forced to do everything without AI” and the second is “should they have to do *some* things without AI.”
For advanced math, everybody uses calculators, but there’s still value in making kids learn long division.
I'm sympathetic to the concerns underlying these rules, but I worry they're so broad and unrealistic that they're unlikely to be taken seriously by students.
It bars using "AI" to check grammar; I think that would cover MS Word's grammar check function, which is AI-trained.
@ProfArbel Having taught LRW for three years, I think that’s a wildly simplistic understanding of its goals. A lot of it is about learning how to figure out the answer to legal questions and how to think them through logically.
@ProfArbel Whether it can be taught or not, one can't ever become a good writer without getting practice doing it. (not sure what you mean by the problem is solved).
@ProfArbel I'm specifically sympathetic to the idea that students should develop the skill of writing, even if AI will ultimately play a tremendous role in the generation of their legal work product. If students are just turning in fully AI-written papers, I'm not sure what the point is.
I am continually surprised by how poor Westlaw's interface is and how little it has improved over time. When I type "Cox" into the search bar, the suggestion should be a case w/ that name, not "Litigation Analytics" about how often various judges named Cox grant summary judgment.