The law. The lawyers. The outcome. Which one intrigues us the most? Our court system is a complex one, and one that is constantly evolving, constantly under criticism and always a source of public interest.
Why are we so interested in the law? The process is complex and tedious. The wait is long and hard. The real life and blood of law is everything we don’t see on T.V. An overwhelming majority of cases don’t reach the Supreme Court and much of what goes on (in local and state courts for example) is shielded from the public. But the law does, in fact matter. It matters because it was created “by the people and for the people.” No matter
how little of its complexity we understand, the law has created our society. The legislature can make laws, the president can approve them, but the court has the power to interpret them. These laws have set our standards, and by doing so, defined who we are.
In 1834, a slave named Dred Scott was taken by his master, from the slave state of Missouri to the free state, Illinois. His master moved on to Wisconsin territory and eventually returned to Missouri. Following the death of his master, Dred Scott sued for freedom, arguing that he had been liberated upon entering free territory. But America wasn’t on the road to abolition yet. Scott lost the case and like any other landmark case, the ruling had a profound effect on thousands of people. Beyond any reasoning, the
court’s decision spoke for itself: the United States would continue to accept slavery, and freedom wouldn’t be won easily.
Fast forward to 1978, the year in which Justice Lewis Powell declared that affirmative action was constitutional and that race, as a result, could be used as a factor in admissions decisions. This decision impacts us in a palpable way today. It defines the way we think about admissions. It’s one of the reasons why we worry that we may not be good enough, and one of the reasons why thousands of high school students burst into tears each year – of happiness and sadness.
The bottom line is that our lives have been inadvertently and uncontrollably shaped by decisions made in the courts. Our lives have been shaped by the lawyers who walk up and down the streets of New York in tailored, black suits, and who sit behind desks at night, shuffling through old documents and examining past cases. It’s worth trying to understand these people because of how influential they are. Their lives are complex, and the work they do lives very much behind the scenes. We can begin to understand the convoluted
nature of law, by sympathizing with the lawyers. Some sanity, despite the insanity bred from the “wrong” decisions made by the courts and the murderers who have gone on the loose for years, can come from realizing that we are only human, and that is not perfect. We try our best – because the law has such a large impact on us, but sometimes we mess up, sometimes the economy, the busy schedules, or the need to care for a family, messes things up for us.
The article, “The last Days of Big Law” is like many others. It unveils the inner workings of big law firms. It’s one of those articles that reminds us that “real life” is rough and competitive in nature. Apparently, not even a lawyer gets free lunch (a metaphorical phrase considering that some actually did get free food for lunch). We seem to know the story already. I’ve watched PBS videos about the not-so-glamorous life of Harvard medical school graduates. I’ve read Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs, a revealing book about inner workings of Apple. Nevertheless, this article is an insightful and informed one which gives the assuming reader a sense that law involves more than making the right decisions. Being a partner isn’t like it used to be, it says. There is a lot less security and protection. Law
firms can no longer afford to pick and choose between clients – they need clients. Everything is changing because conditions are changing. That includes the economy, our greed, and the demand for high-charging lawyers. According to the author, there just aren’t enough companies or wealthy individuals that have billions of dollars on the line and who are willing to pay the most to get the best. Nowadays, an increasing number of clients pay to get a good bargain, an approach that doesn’t fit the old business model. The article also illuminates the hard life of the typical law school graduate, $100,000 in debt and jobless. Under pressure to earn money, lawyers often make pitches to the detriment of
their colleagues.
Of course, it isn’t fair to claim that lawyers are the reason why the law in general receives so much criticism. As a matter of fact, lawyers work for both parties – the guilty and not guilty. They are a part of the law system, however, which includes the Justices who make the final rulings, the president and Congress who themselves can influence law practice
by opinion, and the jury, composed of regular people such as you and me. Their lives can’t be so different from the life of a lawyer. After all, life isn’t easy and almost nothing is as perfect as it seems on the surface. In the end, it all helps to explain why we don’t always make the right decisions, even when they can change the world. It’s a profession, after all, and other influences are inevitably present.
So which is the most intriguing? The law, the lawyers, or the outcome that these elements have on us? All three are difficult to fully understand, and at times appear to be mysterious and largely imperfect. To the average citizen, it’s difficult to explain the rationale behind the right of some courts to reverse decisions by other courts on the same case. For anyone who isn’t a lawyer, the life and work of one is often misunderstood. And finally, the outcomes often end in outrage and blame. Fingers are pointed and questions are raised as to how the law can allow for such atrocity. But despite it all, they are all interesting and all of them help us to reflect upon ourselves, human nature, and the complexity and difficulty – the impossibility of creating a system that will always guide us towards the right decision.
Sources:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0101289.html
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113941/big-law-firms-trouble-when-money-dries?src=longreads
Hi there Sarah.
I love the smoothness of your writing. You do a great job of setting the stage through the first half or so: carefully providing textual examples, bringing to light the effects of the decisions on us, then transitioning to the “Big Law” article by arguing the worth of understanding the lawyers. This makes it very easy to read. And I like your voice, as well. You impart an interest to the reader with straight, strong phrases like these: ” This decision impacts us in a palpable way today. It defines the way we think about admissions.” Your writing sounds earnest and natural.
That said, I feel that you weren’t ambitious in your arguments. Your thesis that the legal system is complicated yet important isn’t striking. Additionally, at the end, when your focus shifted to distinctions between the law, lawyers, and the effects on the public, it seemed like you were losing sight of your thesis. I think that may be what Michael meant when he noted “no central argument.” I think it would be great if you reframed your thesis around these distinctions: “is it the lawyers who have the power, or the legal tradition?” or something like that.
I was really drawn in by the opening paragraph, however I felt as if there was not a real central argument to this piece and mostly reiterated information without making a real argument.
This essay did a really good job of explaining why law is so complicated and difficult to understand, but also how it affects the people so much. I really liked the way you used examples from the past to portray how court rulings have shaped our society. I also liked your direct tone and sentence structure, which made your essay easy to understand. I just wasn’t really sure what exactly the thesis was–is it that we, the common people, should make more of an effort to understand the law? At the beginning and the end, you state that law is complicated but important, but I think this essay would be more effective if you specified the thesis so that it proposes a new idea.