Legal News and Views

April 2, 2026

Fostering Stability in Aging Iniative

The “Fostering Stability in Aging” initiative, led by the ABA Commission on Law and Aging and the Commission on Homelessness and Poverty, is a specialized resource hub and advocacy effort. It aims to prevent homelessness and poverty among older adults by supporting legal professionals with research and tools to enhance access to housing, healthcare, and services….Across the country, older adults are the fastest-growing population facing housing instability and homelessness. Rising housing costs, fixed incomes, health challenges, caregiving burdens and increasing vulnerability to fraud are converging to create a crisis that is both urgent and, too often, unseen.

The American Bar Association Senior Lawyers Division (SLD), in partnership with the ABA Commission on Law and Aging and the ABA Commission on Homelessness and Poverty, is stepping forward with a coordinated, national response:

The Fostering Stability in Aging Initiative is designed to mobilize the legal profession—particularly experienced lawyers – to deliver practical, measurable solutions. It will:

March 29, 2026

Why Lawyers (And Law Librarians) Should Care About Metaphysics

by David Badertscher

Metaphysics is often described as the branch of philosophy that asks the most fundamental question of all: what is real? It explores the nature of existence, identity, causation, and the structure of reality itself. While this may sound abstract, metaphysics is far from remote. In practice, it quietly shapes the assumptions underlying every legal system and every act of legal research.

From the time of Aristotle and Plato, metaphysics has served as the foundation of traditional philosophy. It provides the conceptual framework within which other fields, knowledge, reasoning, and ethics, operate. In law, that framework is not theoretical; it is embedded in doctrine, interpretation, and everyday practice.

Consider a few familiar legal questions:

March 24, 2026

ABA Criminal Justice Section: What’s New in March 2026

by David Badertscher

In this month’s Inside the Section, Chair Melba Pearson speaks with Maryam Ahranjani, editor of “Women in Criminal Law: A Practical Guide for Inclusive Thriving Workplaces.” The book was published this year and provides personal insights and research-based suggestions for creating better working environments for women criminal lawyers.

ALSO WATCH MELBA’S UPDATE AT THIS VIDEO

February 26, 2026

American Association of Law Libraries (AALL): The Education Edge

by David Badertscher

Welcome to The Education Edge—the new name and refreshed look of what was formerly the [AALL] Education Update. Designed to keep you learning and moving forward, The Education Edge highlights timely resources, ideas, and opportunities to support your professional growth.

Explore resources of The Education Edge.

February 25, 2026

Overview of Two VERDICT Columns by Marci A. Hamilton on the Epstein Files*

by David Badertscher

Two recent opinion columns published on Justia Verdict – Legal Analysis and Commentary from Justia examine the legal, political, and moral implications of the continuing disclosures surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein investigations. Written by Professor Marci A. Hamilton of the University of Pennsylvania and founder of CHILD USA, the essays present a forceful argument that accountability for systemic abuse requires sustained legal pressure and public transparency. The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent the official position of Justia.

1. “The Three Avenues to Justice in the Epstein Cases” (Feb. 24, 2026)

In The Three Avenues to Justice in the Epstein Cases, Professor Hamilton argues that meaningful accountability is likely to emerge through three principal legal pathways rather than through federal prosecutorial initiative alone.

February 19, 2026

From Capability to Integration: A Lawyer’s View of AI’s Next Phase

by David Badertscher

A recent practitioner commentary offers a confident assessment of the current state of large language models (LLMs) in legal practice, arguing that the primary barriers to adoption are no longer questions of intelligence or reliability but rather issues of infrastructure and workflow integration. Writing from the perspective of a lawyer who uses advanced models daily, the author contends that modern systems have already reached a level of practical competence sufficient for much of routine legal work, and that the profession’s hesitation reflects outdated assumptions about hallucinations and model limitations.

Central to the argument is the claim that hallucinations, once the dominant concern surrounding generative AI, have largely receded as a meaningful obstacle. According to the author’s experience, newer models rarely produce fabricated information, and overall error rates compare favorably with those of competent junior associates. This view reflects a broader shift in perception: rather than treating LLMs as experimental tools requiring constant skepticism, the author frames them as increasingly dependable collaborators capable of supporting substantive legal tasks.

The post also challenges prevailing narratives about the intellectual difficulty of legal work. While acknowledging that certain cases demand deep expertise, the author suggests that the majority of legal tasks rely on skills such as careful reasoning, synthesis of precedent, structured writing, and research , areas where modern LLMs already excel. By reframing legal practice as process-driven rather than exclusively intellectually rarefied, the commentary positions AI as well aligned with the day-to-day realities of the profession.

February 17, 2026

U.S. Map of Copyright Suits v AI Companies: All 81 Cases

by David Badertscher

From: ChatGPTis Eaing the World’s Substack, February 17, 2026

“Here’s the latest U.S. Map of Copyright Suits v. AI companies. Total = 81 copyright suits. We added the recently filed lawsuit Kleiner v. Adobe in the Northern District of California, another case using the ever-popular Shadow Library Strategy”

February 11, 2026

Better than the Real Thing? Promises and Perils of Synthetic Data: An Overview of Professor Peter Lee’s Essay Published in VERDICT

by David Badertscher

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Professor Peter Lee’s VERDICT essay argues that synthetic data may revolutionize AI development by providing scalable, legally safer training material. Yet he warns that artificial datasets introduce new risks such as model collapse, bias, and misuse that demand proactive legal oversight. Rather than replacing existing regulatory debates, synthetic data transforms them, requiring courts, policymakers, and information professionals to rethink how innovation, privacy, and intellectual property intersect in the AI era

BETTER THAN THE REAL THING?

January 26, 2026

Statement of ABA President Michelle A. Behnke RE: Shootings in Minneapolis

by David Badertscher

From ABA News and Insights , January 26, 2026.

CHICAGO, Jan. 26, 2026 — Our nation is hurting. People are mourning the loss of two lives at the hands of immigration agents in Minneapolis. There is confusion and fear as to the legalities at hand. Let’s be clear: This level of violence is not normal.The gravity of these incidents cannot be overstated. The American Bar Association emphasizes the need for a fair and open government investigation into the shooting deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good, both U.S. citizens. Only through a full and proper investigation will the facts of these incidents come to light.

Beyond the investigations, as the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA underscores the important constitutional rights that are at stake. The constitutional rights at issue must be protected. These include freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of the press.

January 4, 2026

Search and Seizure Beyond Borders: Limits in Territorial Law Enforcement

by David Badertscher

Introduction

Territorial search and seizure lies at the intersection of constitutional law, international law, and foreign relations. While domestic legal systems generally define clear rules governing when and how governments may search persons, property, or data, those rules become more complex, and often contested, when enforcement activities cross national borders. In an era marked by transnational crime, cyber intrusion, terrorism, and global data flows, the traditional notion that a state’s law enforcement authority stops at its borders has been steadily eroded, even as the principle of territorial sovereignty remains central to international law.

This post examines territorial search and seizure as it relates to international affairs, focusing on the tension between state sovereignty, constitutional protections, and the practical demands of global security and law enforcement.