Will Fed. Appellate Courts Ever Allow Oral Argument by Phone or Video?

[quincy]

Did I miss something? I don't see anything about AI before your post.

You missed something. A post was reported for moderator review.

Paul's latest post said something about replacing judges and law clerks with AI, which led to my comment.

 

[Taxing Matters]

You missed something. A post was reported for moderator review.

Paul's latest post said something about replacing judges and law clerks with AI, which led to my comment.

Ah, I see. Some litigants when they lose might well feel like a computer would do the job better than the human judge who handled their case. There is no way that AI in its current state could do what a judge does, nor do I think we would want a computer doing the work of a judge. There are very human sensibilities that come into play in hearing cases and removing that element would serve to make the system less just and more inflexible.

 

[quincy]

Agreed.

I think Paul is upset that his brief did not help him.

His post has been returned to the thread after editing by the moderator, by the way, if you want to see who else he wants replaced with AI. Apparently tax attorneys are irreplaceable.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Agreed.

I think Paul is upset that his brief did not help him.

His post has been returned to the thread after editing by the moderator, by the way, if you want to see who else he wants replaced with AI. Apparently tax attorneys are irreplaceable.

Of course we are.

It sounds like he was upset that the court's decision on the en banc hearing was not only against him, but that the order denying the hearing said little if anything about why it was not granted. That's not all that unusual; the courts do not often go into much detail when denying such petitions. He should not have been all that surprised about the outcome, either, since the standard to get an en banc hearing is very high and his case really did not meet that standard. Very, very few cases do.

I sympathize with the disappoinment of losing a case. At the end of any appeal process, one party loses. That's just the nature of litigation. That the litigant loses does not make the judge bad. And even if judges are replaced by AI, someone is still going to lose the case. And then the loser would be urging that the AI be replaced by something else...maybe smart space aliens or something.