courts and the entire legal system move.

There is zero sense of urgency to get anything done.

I think there's also a fundamental problem with how law is taught, how lawyers are trained. There's no underlying theory of justice. As a result, attorneys will argue the most ludicrous things, as evidenced by recent claims on the part of attorneys supporting Trump, or the separation of young children from their parents, and so on.

Apparently you didn't attend law school, or you'd know that wasn't true. We were, in fact, taught theories of law and justice and their origins (and there are a number of conflicting theories of what "justice" means and how to arrive at it). We were required to take an ethics course, and there is a whole separate section of the bar exam covering legal ethics. There are also procedural rules and other mechanisms built into the system to try to prevent lawyers from making ludicrous arguments, including monetary sanctions and attorney disciplinary procedures.

So how did Consovoy get away with the ludicrous argument that a president can't be prosecuted or even investigated for committing a crime while in office, including shooting someone on Fifth Avenue? Well, we don't know that he's gotten away with it because the court hasn't decided the matter yet. But he could claim with a semi-straight face he didn't really propose a ludicrous theory that's not supported by the law because no court has yet ruled on the issue (though that's probably because it's so obviously dumb that nobody has ever raised it before). Lawyers' rules of professional conduct require lawyers to represent their clients "zealously" but within the bounds of the law. Unfortunately, like all other professions, the legal profession has its share of dubious characters, and it's become obvious that Trump has been hiring only the most ethically-challenged members of the bar - probably because no ethical lawyer who values his/her reputation and law license wants to work for him.

Why does the legal process take so long? For one thing, it's because the cases we're paying attention to are not by any means the only cases the courts are handling (367,937 cases were filed in the federal district courts in 2017). Everybody wants their case to be given fair consideration, which means that each case has to be scheduled so that the parties' lawyers have a reasonable amount of time to research their case, write briefs if necessary, and prepare for their arguments or trials. The judges have to have time to prepare to hear a case, and then write an opinion that fairly addresses the parties' arguments. The memorandum issued by the judge in the Mueller grand jury matter that came out yesterday was 74 pages long. We were all delighted by how thoroughly she addressed the issues - but you don't write something like that overnight, even with the help of law clerks.

It's difficult, complicated work so it's often slow, but it's not for lack of a sense of urgency.

usually feels like a nearly complete lack of a sense of urgency.

Recently we've had some high profile cases dismissed here in New Mexico because the DA office couldn't file charges in a timely manner. Or evidence goes mysteriously missing which I realize would be the responsibility of police departments.

No, I have not attended law school but I have been a paralegal for a while, which I know is not at all the same as being a lawyer.

And I'm amazed to learn that you were taught theories of law, because everything I've ever read or seen concerning law school simply seems to have students discussing specific cases in whatever field the class is covering. I really do learn something new every day.

and a pornography case had been appealed to our court. The problem was that by the time we got the trial court file, all the trial exhibits - the porn in question - had disappeared from it, so the case had to be dismissed. We never did find out who stole the dirty books from the file. You could guess from their titles what they were about and that they were, in fact, porn, but without the exhibits there was no case. We got a chuckle out of the whole thing, though.

of evidence in any form. What's recently happened here in NM is clearly just the icing on the cake.

Sometimes they're covered as an integral part of the particular subject being taught - e.g., Tort Law, Contracts, Con Law - but much of it is taught as separate courses. Often the teaching method includes case study, but it's not limited to that

I was under the distinct (apparently erroneous) impression that legal theory was never taught. I vaguely knew that ethics was taught.

But that brings me back to my essential question: Why is it that all attorneys seem to be free agents, and that there is no underlying legal theory ever? All I ever see in any discussions of cases is what each side claims. No sense of underlying theory on either side. Just case studies and precedent, which don't ever add up to underlying theory.

That's why that study is so important.

But the theories must be applied with some flexibility because the law is not a science. It's completely dependent upon the individual facts of each particular case.

Lawyers are taught less to memorize precedent than to develop the reasoning and analytical skills to apply precedent to different fact patterns, to know when a particular precedent controls, and when it can be distinguished based upon something different about a certain set of facts.

That's one of the reasons most law professors use the Socratic Method and don't just lecture. Lawyers must learn to analyze, not memorize because every case they encounter is different, so they need to understand how to apply the law to that situation and how to shift their thinking when the circumstances are different. And there's not always necessarily a "right" answer.

I hope that makes sense.

However, I frequently am horrified that lawyers can so earnestly argue completely opposite sides of a case. And they often seem to be (to this non lawyer) arguing completely contradictory and exclusionary facts.

I do understand that there are lots of ambiguities. I personally know of a recent case where a recently furloughed inmate robbed some banks, and as a consequence is back in jail, probably for the rest of his life. Because I know specifics in this case, I'm heartbroken that this man wasn't given more leniency. By which I mean that a rigid application of law can sometimes leave little room for humanity or compassion. All that is quite different from what we've been discussing above, and yet is still related.

The law, (as I understand it) is not a monolith. Nor are people all the same, nor do all actions result in the same consequences. And yet we somehow think that the law should both encompass such differences and somehow transcend them.

It's not easy.

Again, thank you for your explanation.

Hence you see them making arguments contradictory.

When your country is being burned to the fucking ground you may want to expedite certain cases. These are not complicated cases. This is Trump and his lawyers abusing the system in order to run out the clock. They are going to lose this cases and they know it.

In many of the others it's apparent that Trump is trying to delay the process as much as possible. I wouldn't say the cases aren't complicated, though. While some are bullshit, some of them do raise new legal issues, and those are the ones that will take longer.

.... from Trump

when it comes to states' budgets with the result that courts are chronically short-staffed.

Just have to keep reminding them "what are you afraid of?" ... because the majority of the public will figure out the behavior

There is lots of law to sort through and understand.

If Trump seizes control of the DOJ and dismisses Congress, the last thing in the world I want is Instant Law.

Which has effectively stopped all legislation...and he has tied up courts all over the USA...

What is instant law?

You can bet if it were the democrats that were under scrutiny, the court systems would move very quickly. I don't understand the delay either. I am so sick and tired of the reps putting up one road block after another. There should be some way to block all of them and show them our strength and beat them at their own game. I would love to see all of them behind bars!!!

No repugs in Schiffs basement proceedings! Its a start. Let them bitch.

All of the Committees have majority (Democrats) and minority (Republicans) members. There is nothing stopping the minority members from attending any of these hearings and according to the Committee chairs, the Republican members of the Commitees HAVE attended. Those not authorized are turned away.

This has been the most frustrating and infuriating thing about the Democrats attempts to get to justice. SCOTUS should be mediating disputes between the executive and legislative branches. The crisis is ongoing and we have no recourse but to wait patiently while drumpf keeps dismantling the country.

In fact, the courts are very reticent - for good reason - to mediate disputed between the legislative and executive branches and do so only when absolutely necessary and only after all other avenues for reconciliation have been tried and failed.

for very good - and very obvious reasons!

In my opinion (for what it's worth) the court will probably ultimately get dragged into this .. but they have every reason to be VERY reluctant. Two (perhaps 3) co-equal branches of government .. and assigning responsibilities to pick winners and losers here .. is neither an easy, or desirable, thing.

"We want your taxes"

nope.

"We want your testimony"

nope.

"We want the Mueller report."

nope.

Every single one of these disputes has landed in the hands of the judiciary and drumpf is going to LOSE all of them because he has no legal standing but he's going to waste MONTHS of time in between. And that comes with consequences. (Namely the impeachment building case taking far too long to develop). If it wasn't for drumpf's own stupidity with Ukraine we would STILL be waiting for the courts to help us get the Documents we need for Russia and the Mueller report was released in MARCH.

Ultimately this is all McConnell's fault (drumpf should have been removed from office by a Senate that cares more about country than party years ago).

But I think we are going to see a LOT of things change in all three branches of our government. This presidency is unlike anything the country has ever seen and drumpf has exposed every flaw and loophole in every system we have and the "stalling in the courts" has been a big part of that.

It is fucking ridiculous that Trump is able to do this and get away with it the way he has. His lawlessness has exposed many problems that need to be prevented in the future.