Articles Posted in David Badertscher

Inspired by Axios’s “Behind the Curtain: A White-Collar Bloodbath” (May 28, 2025)

Dario Amodei, cofounder and CEO of Anthropic, is issuing an urgent warning: advanced artificial intelligence may soon pose a serious threat to millions of white-collar jobs. While today’s AI systems, like Anthropic’s own Claude and OpenAI’s ChatGPT, are currently seen as productivity boosters, Amodei cautions that this could quickly change as models become dramatically more powerful.

In internal presentations recently shared with government officials, Amodei projected that future AI models, potentially arriving in the early 2030s, could be capable of performing 80 to 90% of tasks typically handled by college educated professionals. These include jobs in legal research, finance, marketing, and customer service. For example, AI tools are already being deployed to automate paralegal tasks and financial analysis; and some early adopter companies are replacing portions of their human customer support teams with large language model (LLM) chatbots.

From article by Chris Smith, published in BGR on May 22, 2025.

In this post, we are sharing insights from the Chris Smith article referenced below, as it highlights what is widely recognized as the next critical trend in real world AI applications, including AI wearables.

ABSTRACT:

Opening Statement:

In a democracy founded on the rule of law, the independence of the legal profession is not merely a professional concern, it is a public necessity. Recent events involving unprecedented attempts to target a prominent law firm highlight the critical intersection between the role of lawyers and the constitutional limits on presidential power. Understanding this moment requires not only examining the specific facts but appreciating the broader principles at stake: free speech, access to counsel, and the preservation of democratic governance against executive overreach.

Introduction

To those of us who have benefited from SLA membership, this announcement is sad news. After 116 years of dedicated service to information professionals and specialized librarians, the Special Libraries Association (SLA) has announced its decision to initiate a dissolution process. The global organization, known for its unwavering support in the field, has been a cornerstone for professionals seeking specialized knowledge and resources. This marks the end of an era for the profession as we reflect on the significant contributions and impact the SLA has had over more than a century.

Announcement of SLA dissolution:

The Special Libraries Association (SLA), a global organization dedicated to supporting information professionals and specialized librarians, has announced it will begin a dissolution process after 116 years of service to the profession.

This posting consists of commentary on  Roger Citron’s article, Judge Wilkinson’s Dualist Opinion in Abrego Garcio v. Noem: Judicial Review of Executive Action in a Transformative Time amplified with information from additional sources related to Bruce Ackerman’s theory of the United States as a dualist democracy.

In his article, Roger Citron revisits Bruce Ackerman’s theory of the United States as a dualist democracy, presenting a timely analysis of how this framework sheds light on current constitutional tensions. Through a close reading of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III’s opinion in Abrego Garcia v. Noem, Citron suggests we may be witnessing an effort at higher lawmaking—a constitutional transformation driven not just by legal arguments, but by political and public realignment.

Ackerman’s concept of dualist democracy, introduced in We the People: Foundations, distinguishes between two modes of governance (Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations 6–8 (1991),

The digital age has dramatically expanded how we connect, communicate, and share. Yet with these advances come new risks—especially for vulnerable individuals targeted through online platforms. One of the most alarming forms of harm emerging in this environment is cyber sexual misconduct, which encompasses a broad range of non-consensual, sexually inappropriate behaviors conducted via digital means.

As technology evolves faster than the law can keep up, cyber sexual misconduct presents pressing questions about privacy, consent, and accountability. Increasingly, these acts are being recognized not merely as ethical violations, but as criminal offenses requiring serious legal and societal responses.

What Is Cyber Sexual Misconduct?

The U.S. Constitution enshrines a system of separation of powers, ensuring that legislative, executive, and judicial branches operate independently while keeping one another in check. This structure is meant to prevent the concentration of power and to safeguard individual liberty. But in recent years, many legal scholars, judges, and concerned citizens have raised a critical question: Has the balance of power shifted too far in favor of the Executive Branch?

Following a brief discussion about what the Founding Fathers believed about separation of powers, this post examines key constitutional flashpoints—executive orders, emergency powers, war powers, pardons, and more—illustrating how modern challenges are testing the limits of our separation-of-powers framework.

What the Founding Fathers Believed About Separation of Powers

Since writing and publishing my 1982 article, An Examination of the Dynamics of Change in Information Technology as Viewed From Libraries and Information Centers, 75 Law Library J. 198 (1982). I have learned a great deal—so much, in fact, that a completely new article is necessary. What I have come to understand more deeply is the universality of change—how it shapes everything within us and around us. This realization has transformed my perspective, and I believe it is important to share these new insights. I hope you find this fresh perspective both valuable and thought-provoking, and that it inspires you to share it with others.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    David Badertscher

INTRODUCTION

Change is the driving force behind everything—from the expansion of the universe to the evolution of life and the rise and fall of civilizations. It fuels both entropy, which pushes systems toward disorder, and evolution, which shapes complexity and adaptation. But is change simply a consequence of these forces, or is it the deeper, underlying principle guiding all transformation?

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed numerous industries, and legal research is no exception. Emerging AI-powered tools have introduced new efficiencies in case law analysis, contract review, compliance monitoring, and legal document automation. Among these innovations, DeepSeek, an open-source large language model (LLM), has garnered attention for its potential to revolutionize legal research support systems.

DeepSeek offers advanced reasoning capabilities, text summarization, and document analysis functions that could significantly enhance legal workflows. Its open-source nature and adaptability set it apart from proprietary legal research platforms such as Westlaw Edge, LexisNexis, and Casetext’s CoCounsel. However, its viability as a legal research tool must be assessed not only in terms of its technological capabilities but also through the lens of accuracy, security, regulatory compliance, and ethical considerations.

In his essay, Do State Legislatures Have to Obey U.S. Supreme Court Decisions?  Amherst professor Austin Sarat discusses how several state legislatures, particularly Alabama, are passing laws allowing the death penalty for child rape despite a 2008 Supreme Court ruling, Kennedy v. Louisiana, that declared such punishment unconstitutional. Professor Sarat argues that this strategic legislative defiance represents a dangerous trend that threatens constitutional order, as lawmakers are deliberately passing unconstitutional laws hoping the current conservative-majority Supreme Court will overturn precedent, similar to the strategy that led to Roe v. Wade being overturned.

Reflecting on the urgency expressed by professor Sarat regarding this question, we have prepared our own report, titled Do State Legislatures Have to Obey U.S. Supreme Court Decisions?, An Overview, to provide an added frame of reference for considering the implications of professor Sarat’s posting. Our Report, which follows, is based on our search of related sources, including Deep Research, the advanced AI research application recently introduced by Open AI.

DO STATE LEGISLATURES HAVE TO OBEY U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS?, An Oveerview

Contact Information