I've long felt that novel legal arguments should be considered intellectual property. Once lawyers are forced to pay to cite precedent, the whole landscape will change....
It also widens the already massive gap in the legal defense the poor get versus the legal defense the rich get.
Let's not make class warfare easier.
I'm confused by this comment. What change would you expect? What would the benefit be? (Just interested.)
I believe he's hoping the whole legal system would be forced to become less ponderous - sad and not terribly admirable hope. Those people who supported absurdity on the principle that "no one would let such absurdity stand" are a sad footnote in the advance of bureaucratic complexity. The best you can say is they probably haven't done as much damage as the simply greedy.