Articles Posted in Law Libraries

by

Promising results suggest a potentially groundbreaking approach to predicting undesirable AI behavior, but limited experimental testing calls for further independent verification.

Introduction

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into professional practice, education, government, healthcare, and everyday life, questions concerning the reliability and safety of AI-generated responses have taken on growing importance. A particularly troubling possibility is that an AI chatbot may initially provide appropriate, useful, and accurate information, only to begin producing potentially harmful responses as a conversation progresses.

Continue reading

by

Introduction

Microsoft is pushing artificial intelligence beyond the familiar chatbot model toward something considerably more ambitious: AI systems that can not only answer questions and generate content but also perform, coordinate, and continue work on behalf of users. A recent video from AI Study Hub, Microsoft Has Revealed a Major New Wave of AI Technology, presents these developments as potentially reshaping computers, software, and business. Although the video provides a useful starting point, Microsoft’s own announcements and other recent reporting provide important context for understanding what has actually been announced, what remains in preview, and what the longer-term implications may be.  At the center of these developments is Microsoft’s major redesign of Copilot.

From AI Assistant to an “Operating System for Work”

Continue reading

by

Introduction

Professional conferences have long occupied an important place in the continuing education and development of law librarians and legal information professionals. They provide opportunities to learn about emerging technologies, exchange ideas, establish professional relationships, and consider developments affecting the future of the profession. Yet these benefits raise a question that has become increasingly important in an era of constrained budgets and rapidly evolving technology: How can the value of conference participation be demonstrated not only to those who attend, but also to the institutions that employ them and pay the bills?

A September 29, 2026, article published on On Firmer Ground, titled “Why Attend? Reflections on the 2026 AALL Annual Conference and the PLLIP Summit”, provides a timely starting point for considering this question. The reflections in that article invite a broader examination of professional conferences as opportunities not merely for individual advancement but also for strengthening the institutions that employ legal information professionals. That distinction becomes especially important as artificial intelligence transforms legal research, information management, and organizational decision-making.

Continue reading

by

Introduction

This proposed legislation  is more consequential for libraries and government-information professionals than its title might initially suggest. It is not simply an internal GPO housekeeping bill; it would substantially rewrite the statutory framework governing the Federal Depository Library Program, digital preservation, permanent public access, cataloging, and the National Collection. In this post the strongest emphasis is on permanent public access, preservation of born digital government information, the modernization of the FDLP, and the implications for law librarians and researchers. Those features distinguish this bill from what might otherwise appear to readers to be a largely administrative modernization of GPO.

H.R. 9342, the GPO Modernization Act of 2026, was introduced on June 18, 2026, by Representative Stephanie Bice of Oklahoma. Its stated purpose is “[t]o revise certain authorities of the Government Publishing Office, and for other purposes.” The bill was referred to the House Committee on House Administration and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Continue reading

by

Introduction

Two distinguished law professors recently offered incoming law students advice from different but unusually complementary perspectives. Vikram David Amar, writing broadly about the habits of mind and disciplined effort required to succeed in law school, is principally concerned with how students learn to think like lawyers. Michael C. Dorf, focusing more specifically on artificial intelligence, considers how that learning process can be preserved and adapted at a time when AI systems can produce seemingly authoritative answers almost instantly.

Considering their essays together reveals an important relationship that might be less apparent if each were read in isolation. The traditional methods through which law students develop legal reasoning, judgment, and intellectual independence are now encountering technologies capable of retrieving information, summarizing complex material, and generating plausible responses with remarkable speed. The question is therefore not simply whether students should use AI, but how they can take advantage of useful technological tools without allowing those tools to displace the intellectual work that legal education is intended to cultivate.

Continue reading

by

On August 12, 2026, Austin Sarat, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College, published a commentary in Verdict, Justia’s legal analysis and commentary publication. Sarat’s commentary is titled “Trump’s Arresting State,” where he examines what he regards as an increasingly consequential feature of the Trump administration: the use or threatened use of arrest, prosecution, fines, and other criminal penalties not simply against political opponents, but as a means of pressuring state and local officials to cooperate with federal policy objectives.

Sarat’s article is strongly critical of the administration. His central concern is that the threat of criminal enforcement may be moving beyond conventional law-enforcement situations and into disputes involving government authority and public policy, particularly immigration enforcement and the administration of elections. Because Sarat’s article is commentary rather than a neutral news report, it is useful to examine his arguments alongside the administration’s own statements, relevant government documents, and other primary sources. Doing so provides a fuller context within which readers can evaluate both Sarat’s concerns and the federal government’s stated legal and policy justifications.

From Political Rhetoric to Governmental Power

Continue reading

by

From the  Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

S. 3733, a bill to amend the Passport Act of June 4, 1920, to authorize certain public libraries to collect and retain a fee for the execution of a passport application as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on June 17, 2026. This bill would authorize the Department of State to restore the ability of nongovernmental public libraries to accept passport applications. The bill also would require the department to report to the Congress within 30 days of enactment on whether it has done so.

COST ESTIMATE,

Continue reading

by

FROM THE LAW LIBRARY AT THE WASHINGTON AND  LEE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW:

The 2025 W&L Law Journal Rankings are now available!

Released on July 15, 2026, the 2025 Rankings provide citation data and calculated ranks for the top 400 U.S.-published law journals and the top 100 law journals published outside the United States. Journals ranked below these thresholds display “NR” (Not Ranked) for each data category and are listed alphabetically. The survey span of the 2025 ranking is five years (2021-2025). For more information about the new and previous rankings, please see our Methodology page.

Continue reading

by

David G. Badertscher

“Every generation of legal researchers inherits new tools. Their enduring responsibility is to learn how to use them wisely.”

Introduction

Continue reading
Contact Information
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2026, David Badertscher
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design