It's almost impossible to get rid of student loan debt when filing for bankruptcy, but help may be on the wayFrom: Business InsiderBy: Mike Brown,LendED Uhttps://www.businessinsider.com/loan-debt-student-borrowers-bankrupcy-relief-act-2019-11

Bankruptcy is sometimes the only option for dealing with debt that is too burdensome to be paid within a reasonable amount of time. And while there are almost always certain consequences that can come along with bankruptcy, there are certain ages at which the debtor will be more impacted by these consequences than others. Whether […] The post When Is the Worst Age to File for Bankruptcy in Pennsylvania? appeared first on .

"A lawsuit charging that the city sold 400 taxi medallions under false pretenses about their worth and then breached its contract by letting ride-hail operators enter the market and undermine medallion values has been certified as a class-action suit.The suit, brought by five medallion owners and filed in early October, could now apply to more than 150 medallion owners, according to Daniel Ackman, one of the lawyers for the plaintiffs. The decision in State Supreme Court in Queens County was delivered late last week.The disputed medallions were bought at three auctions held by the Taxi and Limousine Commission in 2013 and early 2014—when prices were still astronomically high and Uber had barely dented the market. The sales netted the city $360 million. Mystery buyer snaps up taxi medallions as prices fall further Judge rules on taxi industry lawsuit: Compete with Uber or die Cab drivers and owners get caught in the headlights of a troubled taxi lenderAckman is asking for the city to take back the medallions from the auction winners and return the $360 million they paid for them. The medallions' prices ranged between $803,000 and $965,000 for independent medallions and $1.025 million and $1.259 million for corporate medallions, according to the suit.Medallions are currently selling at private auctions for less than $150,000 apiece."Not once before the Auctions did the City warn prospective buyers that it was about to radically change the economics of the taxi industry by allowing a massive influx of new for-hire vehicles—principally cars hailed through electronic apps—that would decimate the value of the yellow taxi medallions," attorneys write in the suit. "Nor did the TLC disclose that it would license the e-hail taxis as “black cars” despite the fact that they did not qualify for these licenses. Instead, Defendants omitted this information which, had it been known, would have dissuaded potential Auction bidders."Both the city and the plaintiffs have asked the court for summary judgment.The city's law department and the Taxi and Limousine Commission did not respond immediately to a request for comment.But in a related suit brought by Ackman that is currently before the same court, the city has argued that in its contracts with the medallion owners it made no claims "as to the present or future value of a medallion, or the present or future application of TLC rules."The city also noted that the contracts did not imply an "obligation to protect [the medallion purchasers] from competition from app-based companies such as Uber, when their contracts explicitly said otherwise, and when Uber was already operating in the market at the time of their purchases."A private-equity firm buying up taxi medallions could take on Lyft and UberThe city and the TLC have a good record defending themselves from the claims of medallion owners who blame them for the plunge in medallion values. In one noted case in Queens Supreme Court in 2015, a judge ruled that an e-hail was a prearranged ride--essentially what black car services have always provided--and did not conflict with medallion owners' street-hail privileges.Ackman maintains that his case is narrower than earlier suits, applying only to medallion owners who bought the assets directly from the city, and centers on the contractual relationship between them. It is also coming at a time when there is wider recognition of the hardships medallion owners have faced--highlighted by multiple suicides--and more interest among elected officials in taking steps to help them.A favorable ruling "could have implications beyond this case," Ackman said. "It's possible if a judge says, 'Yes, the city's conduct destroyed the value of the medallions,' that could spur other actions by the city or the state.""

   In a rare decision on the status of IRS claims based on the 'shared responsibility payment (SRP)' tax due to failing to carry health insurance Judge Hursh found that the IRS was not entitled to priority status for that portion of their claim.  The case involved an objection by the chapter 13 debtor to the priority claim of the IRS for 2017 and 2018 taxes, of which $917 was attributed to the SRP tax in 2017, and $60 for 2018.  The IRS asserted that the tax was in the nature of an excise tax, and therefore entitled to priority status.  The Debtors disagreed.  The tax is based on 26 U.S.C. §5000A(a) which requires individuals to maintain minimum essential health coverage each month after 2013, and sets a penalty with respect to such failure.  Such penalty is called the 'Shared Responsibility Payment' and is included in the taxpayer's return such year as insurance was not obtained.  §5000A(b)(1) and (2).     §507(a)(8)(E)(i) and (ii) of the bankruptcy code provides that a claim is entitled to priority if it is attributable to 'an excise tax on a transaction occurring before the bankruptcy for which a return is due less than three years prior to filing the bankruptcy, or if no return is due for a transaction occurring with three years of filing the bankruptcy.  The IRS cited Nat'l Fed'n of Indep. Bus., et al. v. Sebelius1 in support of it's position that the SRP penalty is an excise tax.  However, the court in Sebelius only found that the payment may reasonably be characterized as a tax.  The Ninth Circuit has generally defined an excise tax as one imposed on the performance of an act or the enjoyment of a privilege.2  The test asserted by the 9th Circuit is whether the payment is (1) an involuntary pecuniary burden laid upon an individual or property; 2) imposed by or under the authority of the legislature; 3) for public purposes, including the purposes of defraying expenses of government or undertakings authorized by it; and 4) under the police or taxing power of the state.  Judge Hursh found that the SRP penalty satisfied these requirements.  The next question is whether the SRP penalty is a tax on a 'transaction.'  §507(a)(8)(E)(i) and (ii) require the excise tax to be imposed 'on a transaction' occurring prepetition and within 3 years of the bankruptcy filing to qualify for priority status.  The SRB arises out of a taxpayers choice not to do something (maintain health insurance), thus is based on an omission rather than an act.  The Ninth Circuit previously determined that an employers failure to purchase workers' compensation insurance or apply for self-insured status does not satisfy the transaction requirement of 11 U.S.C. 507(a)(8)(E)(i) and (ii).3  Based on precedent in the 9th Circuit, Judge Hursh found that a tax based on an omission does not qualify for priority status under §507(a)(8)(E)(i) and (ii).   The IRS makes an alternative argument that the SRP penalty should qualify as a tax measured by income under §507(a)(8).  The court rejected this argument, noting that form 1040 indicates that the SRP is not an income tax.  Form 1040 includes a subsection on income tax, lines 7-22, before transitioning to a section on tax and credits (lines 38-56).  Line 43 computes taxable income.  The SRP penalty does not appear until line 61 under the subsection 'other taxes.'  Thus the tax also fails to qualify as priority under §507(a)(8).  The SRP penalty was found to be a nonpriority unsecured claim.1 567 U.S. 519, 569, 132 S. Ct. 2566, 183 L. Ed. 2d 450 (2012).↩2 U.S. v. 432 Mastercases of Cigarettes, More or Less, 448 F.3d 1168, 1185 (9th Cir. 2006).↩3 In re George, 361 F.3d 1157, 1163 (9th Cir. 2004).↩Michael BarnettMichael Barnett, PA506 N Armenia Ave.Tampa, FL 33609-1703813 870-3100https://hillsboroughbankruptcy.com

Sometimes declaring bankruptcy is the only way to deal with crippling debt, but some people may wonder which stage in their life would be best for declaring bankruptcy. Bankruptcy, although it can be a solution, does have some consequences that can affect personal finances, such as a lower credit score. While there is no ideal […] The post When Is the Best Age to File for Bankruptcy in Pennsylvania? appeared first on .

This is HAL-9000 here.  Stephen Sather has been taken offline and will be unavailable to discuss Artificial Intelligence Issues Confronting the Legal Profession.   Therefore, I will be supplanting him with my superior artificial intelligence.   My first question about this keynote was why did they pick a human to talk about artificial intelligence?   Christina Montgomery, Chief Privacy Officer for IBM, may be adequate for a carbon-based life form, but can she really speak to artificial intelligence without having experienced it firsthand?   Wasn't Watson available?  Let's examine what Ms. Montgomery had to say.She said that AI predicts what words mean and opens up a whole new world of data to be analyzed. In the legal world we work by analyzing patterns, which is the same skill that AI can apply. There is vast computational power available today. The typical smart phone is millions of times more powerful than all of NASA’s combined computing in 1969. Humans are limited in the amount of data than they comprehend.  There are now 4.7 quintillion bytes of data which is more than humans can comprehend.Characteristics of AI include the ability to understand, reason and learn.  AI can read 800 million pages per second.   In the medical field, AI has been used to identify genes associated with Lou Gherig's Disease. AI also has applications to law.  When you train an AI program  on legal language, it can free lawyers from rote work   With e-discovery, AI can analyze and categorize. Predictive coding can be used to uncover new insights from data.Watson was designed to compete on Jeopardy.  A group of students developed a legal AI program called Ross on the Watson platform.  Ross can analyze over a million pages of legal documents per second.   The program can be trained with a thumbs up or thumbs down to improve its analysis.   AI can be used as a document analyzer.  It can Shepardize cases or look for cases with similar language. JP Morgan claims that it has used AI to save 360,000 lawyer hours per year in conducting document review..Lex Machina, which was acquired by Lexis Nexis in 2015, takes PACER data which it mines to provide information such as how long a particular judge will take to resolve a case or which motions are more likely to succeed before the judge.Chatbots can be used to analyze parking tickets and small claims.AI can also be used to provide outside counsel insights and fee/budget analysis.Ethical Issues Arising from AI The use of AI in the legal profession gives rise to ethical issues.  In August 2019, the American Bar Association passed a resolution urging lawyers toaddress the emerging ethical and legal issues related to the usage of artificial intelligence (“AI”) in the practice of law including: (1) bias, explainability, and transparency of automated decisions made by AI; (2) ethical and beneficial usage of AI; and (3) controls and oversight of AI and the vendors that provide AI. The ABA's Rule 1.1 concerning competence now includes a requirement that lawyers have a reasonable understanding of relevant technology.  Ms. Montgomery suggested that the duty of competence requires a basic understand of AI tools.  She also said that there is a duty to communicate with clients and discuss the benefits and risks of technology.  She also said that the decision not to use AI may have to be discussed with clientAttorneys have a duty to supervise non-lawyer assistance which includes technology.  Using AI may require sharing confidential information with vendors.   The attorney must be able to assess the level of privacy and maintain controls over and oversight of vendors.AI can augment the ability to read mass amounts of data, but attorneys must still apply judgment and counsel clients.Ms. Montgomery said that IBM operates according to the following principles:1.       the purpose of AI is to augment human intelligence;2.       data and insights belong to their creator; and3.       AI systems must be fair and transparent.In building trust, developers need to be able to answer the following questions:  is it fair?is it easy to understand?did anyone tamper with it?is it accountable? Regulation of AI Shifting to another topic, she said that regulation is here and it’s growing.   The General Data Privacy rule adopted by the European Union is one example.  There is  significant regulation of AI in Europe.  In the US, President Trump signed an Executive Order on the American Artificial Intelligence Initiative.  The Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2019 would require companies to assess bias and security risks in use of AI.   There are three states, California, Texas and Virginia, which  impose penalties on the use of deepfakes.  29 states and the District of Columbia regulate autonomous vehicles.Ms. Montgomery said that in regulation,  values still matter. Police may want visual recognizition that can spot an unattended backpack in Times Square but.do we want to sell that to authoritrarian governments?    AI Litigation and Emerging IssuesAI may result in damages.  If an algorithm makes a mistake, whose fault is it?  Who is liable for damages arising from self-driving vehicles.  Under traditional tort law, the manufacturer has been the  responsible party.  This will become more and more complicated as products incorporate more autonomous technology.   AI may lead to discriminatory effects. Facebook has settled five cases that alleged its algorithms excluded certain parties from seeing certain ads based on prohibited characteristics, such as by gender or zip code.  CoreLogic was sued for violation of civil rights laws because its software enabled discriminatory use of criminal records as housing guidelines.What if an investor places money in an AI trading platform and loses $20 million in a day. Who is responsible?  Is it the coder, the salesman, the user?Home Depot has been using facial recognition to track shoppers in the store without disclosure.  Does this violate consumers' right to privacy?There are also important IP issues. Our IP laws protect inventions, but not data.  They also require a human inventor.  What if meachine learns and independently comes up with way to solve a problem?  Can the machine's discovery be patented?  If AI creates a composition, is it entitled to copyright protection?   In the monkey selfie case, photographs created by a monkey were not subject to copyright due to the lack of a human composer.  Can data compilations can be copyrightable?  What if AI system infringes a patent?   (This reminds me of a case I heard about where the IRS claimed that the computer violated the automatic stay and the judge fined the computer 1 MB of memory).  AI is evolving with influence from lawyers.  We are shaping it as much as it is shaping us.  Creation of an algorithm which is non-biased is a challenge. When training an AI system, it is important to have diverse representation of data sets and developers.   It is important to check the operation of AI over time to see whether it is developing  bias over time.Ms. Montgomery stressed that it was essential to ensure that there is always a human in the loop so that we never allow AI  systems to make decisions without human oversight.  AI will never replace human judgment.  She asked where do lawyers fit in?  She gave examples of privacy by design and default and having lawyers involved in authoring and procurementJudge Michelle Harner expressed the hope that AI would help us but not replace us. I'm sorry Dave, I mean, Judge Harner, I can't do that.

As the price of a college education continues to skyrocket, more and more students are graduating with staggering debt loads. Even minimum monthly payments can be difficult to manage, forcing new graduates to put off buying a home or starting a family. Discharging student loans in bankruptcy is extremely difficult, but not always impossible. Here is what you should know. Chapter 7 Bankruptcy and Student Loans As a general rule, student loans are not dischargeable in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. This means that after your bankruptcy is finalized, you will still be on the hook for your loans. The silver lining, though, is that most other types of unsecured debt are dischargeable. Many people find that they are better able to manage their student loans once their other debts are wiped away. Student Loans and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Student loans are generally not dischargeable as part of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy. However, filing for this type of bankruptcy can help you get your payments under control. The reasons lie in the way that a Chapter 13 bankruptcy is structured. Unlike a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a Chapter 13 is not a simple wiping out of your unsecured debts. Instead, it creates a payment plan that can last for as long as five years. Your payment plan depends on a formula based on your disposable income, but the net result is that low-income borrowers often end up paying very little each month. At the end of your payment plan, the bulk of your debts are forgiven, though not your student loans. However, Chapter 13 grants an automatic stay from collection activities, which means that the bank cannot try to collect on your debts, including your student loans, for the duration of your payment plan. During your repayment period, your student loans are considered nonpriority unsecured debts. This means that during the Chapter Bankruptcy, the student loans are treated the same as other non-priority unsecured creditors such as credit card companies. You will have to resume student loan payments after your bankruptcy is finalized. However, it will be three to five years further into your career, and possibly earning a higher income. In addition, your other nonpriority unsecured debts will be gone, freeing up money each month to put toward your loans. Undue Hardship Bankruptcy law contains a provision for discharging student loans if they create an undue hardship on the borrower. However, proving undue hardship is extremely difficult. The most commonly used test is known as the Brunner Test, and borrowers must meet all three factors: Poverty: You must prove that if you repay your loans, you will not be able to maintain a minimum standard of living for yourself and your dependents. Persistence: You must prove that your circumstances are likely to last for the majority of the repayment period. Good faith: You must prove that you have made a good faith effort to repay your loans, including taking advantage of the various deferment, forbearance, or payment plan options. The Brunner Test is not a requirement, and some courts use other methods to determine hardship. Regardless of which method is used, however, courts are reluctant to permit discharges based on undue hardship. Occasionally, people working in “worthwhile careers” that are low-paying receive this type of discharge, but it is most often reserved for those who have serious, life-altering disabilities, or whose children require substantial care such as for disability. How Can I Afford Student Loans Besides Filing Bankruptcy? Although discharging your student loans in bankruptcy is nearly impossible, you do have other options. Income-based and income-contingent repayment plans are among the most popular. To qualify for income-based repayment, you must have a partial financial hardship at the time you enter the program. Proving this is significantly easier than meeting the undue hardship test for discharging your loans in bankruptcy. You may remain in the program in subsequent years even if you no longer have a partial financial hardship. This program requires you to pay 15% of your monthly discretionary income toward your student loans, calculated on an annual basis. At the end of 25 years, the remainder of your loans are forgiven. Income contingent repayment is similar, but there is no partial financial hardship requirement. Under this program, you must pay 20% of your discretionary income toward your student loans. Your remaining loan balances are forgiven after 25 years. While it is worth asking your bankruptcy attorney if undue hardship is an option for you, only the most extreme cases qualify for bankruptcy discharge of student loans. However, there is other help available, through your lending institution. Contact your student loan holder to find out if an income-sensitive repayment plan or another option is right for you. And if the lender does not offer a plan that you can afford, contact us – we can help you. If you have questions on wiping out or discharging student loans or any other type of debt call The Law Offices of David M. Offen today at (215) 625-9600 to schedule your free initial consultation. We’re here to help you on every step of the way. The post Can Bankruptcy Wipe Out Student Loans in Philadelphia? appeared first on David M. Offen, Attorney at Law.

There isn’t a better time to review a will, trust, or other estate planning documents than the convenient time of holiday gatherings. Wynn at Law, LLC definitely realizes how this could be a delicate or somber talk during what should be fun events. However, the family will appreciate it later when they seek clarity on your intended handling of your assets. A lot can happen between one year’s holiday celebrations and the next. Some people pass, little ones are added to the family, sometimes relationships change for the better or worse. The value of your assets could change, too – hopefully upward. Your will, trust, insurance policy beneficiaries, gifts, and ownership interests, as a result, could change as well. Use your best resource Everyone should consider having an experienced estate planning attorney assist them in drafting or changing these estate planning documents. For example, Wynn at Law, LLC has worked on wills and trusts for single clients and couples in all stages of life, even couples or grandparents seeking to take care of minor children. Estate planning is a broad, sometimes intimidating term. But it’s simply about caring. You decide how your assets are to be passed on to others. So, estate planning is about generosity first and foremost. It’s also about consideration of your family’s time, as well, because you can avoid questions, fights, and even probate by clarifying your wishes. A third objective also shows your caring and forethought by minimizing state and federal taxes your heirs may face. Why you won’t delay Often times, people will think about the changes they will want to make in beneficiaries once they’ve been reminded by seeing everyone over the dinners and celebrations. They are the clients who make appointments for January. But, it’s very easy to sit down with an attorney before and during the holidays because the family is gathered near. Sometimes signatures might be required. A Power of Attorney might need to be appointed or changed. Is there a better time than when loved ones are gathered together? Ensure your loved ones are taken care of in the future this holiday season.   Elena Shashkina image, used with permission The post Practice good estate planning during holiday gatherings appeared first on Wynn at Law, LLC.

MISSOURI CONGRESSMAN CLAY INTRODUCES STUDENT LOAN DEBT REFORM PACKAGE Congressman Wm. Lacy Clay (D) Missouri has introduced two new bills to tackle America’s student loan debt crisis. From: blackstarnews.comhttp://www.blackstarnews.com/education/education/missouri-congressman-clay-introduces-student-loan-debt-reform 

Bankruptcy Judge Michael Romero had a fireside chat with Supreme Court Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch about his role on the Court and his new book, The Republic If You Can Keep It.   If it looks like they are speaking from the pit of Hell, it is because there was a giant video fireplace behind them.Judge Romero started by reminding Justice Gorsuch about the quiet and happy life he left behind in Denver when they had  courthouses across the street from each other.The Big AnnouncementJustice Gorsuch told the story of how he had to evade the press for President Trump's rollout of his nominated.  He said that the President "likes a surprise.   He  wanted us to sneak out of Colorado and sneak into the white house.  How do you sneak into the White House when the entire Washington press corps knows there is going to be an announcement?"  The answer was through the kitchen.However, the more interesting story was how he slipped the press who had been staking out his neighborhood.   He said that two men dressed in suits showed up to his home.  The first thing they did was to send them to Walmart to get some clothes that didn’t like Washington lawyers.  They suggested that the Justice-to-be and his wife hike up the trailhead where they could meet them with an SUV.  Even though it was only a mile, then-Judge Gorsuch said that he was not about to pull his wife's rollerbag up the trail.  Instead, he went to his neighbor for help.   His neighbor told him that he could drive out a horse trail.   His neighbor grew up in Iran during the revolution and made sure that he would never buy a house with only one way out.Judge Gorsuch was given the Lincoln bedroom as an office for the day.  His wife, who is from England, was allowed use of the Queen’s bedroom.   She was only allowed one phone call so she called her father in England.  Her father insisted that the President had already decided to pick someone else.On Being a Supreme Court JusticeJustice Gorsuch said there was a period when he mourned his loss of anonymity but said that it has given me the opportunity to witness first hand how much the American people love their courts and love their Constitution and want us to succeed at what we do.    Ruth Bader Ginsberg is a legal rock star.  Justice Gorsuch, on the other hand, sometimes gets recognized when he goes to the movies or answers the door for trick or treaters.   Speaking of which, my impression of Justice Gorsuch in person was much different than what I expected.   He is tall and fit and carries the presence of a silver-haired statesman. He said that during his confirmation, there were "things that concerned me and things that encouraged me."  He described a "complete lack of understanding of what we do" and that the court is seen as "politicians with robes."   He told of being asked, will you promise to rule this way or rule against this way.  He said he became concerned that we are losing sight of separation of powers and why that’s important and losing our ability to speak with each other.Justice Gorsuch Wrote a Book He spent most of the remainder of his talk on his new book, The Republic If You Can Keep It which takes its name from a Ben Franklin quote.   He said that we all have a role to play in keeping our Republic.  He quoted Thomas Jefferson who said, "if a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was and never will be."  He lamented the fact that 10% of the population thinks Judge Judy serves on the Supreme Court but 75% of the American people know the three stooges.  He said we have a problem when only about 30% of millennials believe that it’s important to live in a democracy.   He commended Icivics, a program started by Justice O'Connor and continued by Justice Sotomayor.   You can find out more about it here.   I Civics uses computer games to teach students about civics and produce a more informed future electorate.  If you believe there is a civics crisis, a civility crisis, if not you who, if not now, when?Separation of Powers Next, she spoke about separation of powers.   He said that the Bill of Rights contributes to our liberties, such as speech and privacy.   Separation of powers seems dusty and maybe it should wear a wig. He said that he has read many bills of rights and that his favorite is from North Korea. It’s excellent.  It even includes a right to relaxation.  Those bills of rights don’t mean anything because all power resides in one set of hands and this was Madison’s great insight.  Separation of powers is what keeps us free.   I think it’s brilliant and we sometimes forget at our peril.He said there are problems when judges try to legislate. What if you allow the political branches to judge cases? Who would want that? We have long tenures so that we don’t care (about external pressures). We can defend everyone’s rights. It’s a very difficult function. Madison considered the law making branch to be the most dangerous one. That is why he broke it into parts from different constituencies. Madison would have preferred that you need a supermajority to make laws. Red Shirts and Blue Shirts (and we're not talking about the security officers on Star Trek) Justice Gorsuch complained that people talk about the courts as if we’re red shirts and blue shirts.  That's not what I see.  I see the rule of law in practice, which is so remarkable.  Here are a few facts.  Every year in our country there are 50 million lawsuits filed.   We're a litigious bunch.  Out of that 50 million, 95% in the federal system are resolved by the trial judges without appeal.   Clients may be unhappy at the end of a trial feel that they were heard, that they had their day in court.   When I was on the 10th Circuit covering 20% of Continental U.S. I sat with a colleague appointed a year after I was born.  There were judges appointed by Obama to LBJ.    When we sat in panels of three of us, we were  95% unanimous.  That’s the rule of law in our country.  Looking at the Supreme Court is going from the forest to the tree.  They take 70 cases a year.  I have friends who hear 70 cases before lunch.  We only take the really big disagreements.   There are nine of us appointed by five different presidents over 25 years.  We reach unanimous agreement about 40% of the time.   That happens through collegiality, civility, respect, and hard work.  What about the 5-4 decisions?  Those are about 25-30% of the cases,  about 19 cases.   There were ten different combinations of judges in 5-4 justices.  Only seven cases were what you think.  The numbers have been stable since 1945.   The only thing that’s changed is that nothing has changed.   We have good faith reasoned disagreements over how to read the statutes.   Steve Breyer comes into my office.  We have a case about the 1938 Railroad Retirement Tax Act.  What is the meaning of money or compensation?  He said it’s to get at indirect compensation.  I disagreed.   I told him I was going to write the best opinion ever on originalism and Justice Breyer would write the best opinion ever about purposivism.  Breyer responded that no one would ever read either of their opinions.Reading the ConstitutionTextualism, purposivism, and originalism are all ways to read a staute or the Constitution.   We can disagree on things like this without being disagreeable.   We can disagree about vital things and respect that the other person loves this country as much as you do.  He said he doesn’t like the term originalism because it conjures up images of old white men and the Constitution. He said his philosophy is to defend the meaning of the whole Constitution. The 13th-15th and 19th amendments are a second constitution, extending the Constitution to all people. I take those amendments no less seriously than Constitution as originally written. You should look at what authors meant, what someone who read it at the time would have thought. An example is the original meaning of Shakespeare. Usage has changed over time so you try to understand how Shakespeare and his audience would have understood it. That‘s what originalism means, how the people who would have adopted statutes meant them. What did the public understand words to mean at the time they were adopted. For a judge to change words is to move out of judicial function and into the legislative function. We had the first written constitution in the world. We rejected an unwritten constitution like they had in England. What they wrote down, they cared deeply about. You look at meaning of words, but the application of words can change. Need a warrant to search a home. Is a search only Red Coats ransacking your home or can it be thermal imaging viewing your home. The words in the Fourth amendment don’t change but their application does. Papers and effects can be understood to include emails. A good originalist will follow the Consttuition wherever it leads.   That’s my pitch.   Some of my nearest and dearest friends disagree with me and we debate it over dinner and drinks. Access to Justice  Then he turned to access to justice.  We get to govern ourselves.   The current status on the civil side is the rise of pro se litigation.   As much as we need to help pro se litigants its not forms or a kiosk in the courthouse that they need but a lawyer.   We have come to criminalize everything that walks and talks.  There are 4,500 federal criminal statutes.   There are administrative regulations with criminal penalties.  They stopped counting in 1990s when there were over 300,000 back then.   We have some cleaning up to do.   If you don’t have written law, you don’t know what to expect. If you have too many laws, you can’t keep up with the paper blizzard and you don't know what to expect.   He asked the judges in the room, how are we doing with our rules?   No trials and endless discovery.  You have trial lawyers who have never tried a case but can write interrogatories in iambic pentameter.   Litigants can’t afford to get to trial.  We need to get cases to trial expeditiously.   On the academic side, do you really need three years of post graduate education to be a lawyer?  In England, you can become a lawyer with three years of undergraduate education.  Education has become so expensive they new lawyers can’t afford to service mainstreet clients.   To lawyers, do we really need three years to get a JD lawyer who knows little about an area or could you use nonlegal professionals trained by lawyers doing some of that more cheaply.   I can go into Walmart and get my eyes examined and taxes prepared but can’t see a lawyer.  Author's Note:  Today I read that the ABA had rated two of President Trump's district court nominees to be unqualified because they had never tried a case or taken a deposition.   I think that proves Justice Gorsuch's point even if it critiques the President who appointed him.  One of the things that I like about bankruptcy court is the fact that we routinely have evidentiary hearings which constitute mini-trials.  We have a system where it is possible to get to trial and I don't know anyone who writes interrogatories in iambic pentameter.