Professor Anderson, for God’s sake:
Because clients and society want better, faster and cheaper law, I believe lawyers (including legal educators) have a professional duty to ardently pursue this goal. The hardest part of this assignment – and the most vexing and interesting – is how to parlay this transformation into a decent living.
One of the themes over here is that the law trumps economics. And no lawyer worthy of the name should think otherwise. “Better, faster, and cheaper law”? We’re living in a time of utter lawlessness in the judiciary itself. The only way to make it “better” is to slow it down or stop it entirely before it kills us all.
How do you “parlay” that into a “decent living”? What has that got to do with anything that a lawyer should be concerning himself with in the face of the collapse of the third branch of government?
What planet are these guys on? What are they smoking?