Academic Legal Writing - Eugene Volokh [73]
And he offers a good bottom-line test as well: “Could I show [my work] to the objects of criticism and be assured that they will think I've acted fairly, if not charitably, toward their work[?]” Always ask yourself that.20
XVI. EDITING: THREE EXERCISES
A. Basic Editing
Practice these suggestions using three concrete examples. The first two are paragraphs from real seminar papers written in response to the following assignment:
Your boss, Senator Elaine Mandel, is a member of the State Senate Committee on the Judiciary. The Committee will shortly consider the proposed Child Firearms Safety Act, which states that “Any person who lives in the same household as a minor and who possesses a handgun shall store the handgun unloaded and in a locked container.” Please write a short memo advising the Senator whether she should vote for the law.
Here are the opening paragraphs from the two papers:
The Child Firearm Safety Act as currently written is a well intentioned piece of legislation which will likely have little effect on the incidence of minors accidentally killed by handguns. However, with some critical modifications the act could play a significant role in lowering the number of minors lost to handgun accidents each year. These modifications should include: compelling either that the gun be kept in a locked container or unloaded; the inclusion of long guns in the Act; and making violation of the Act a felony offense.
and
The proposed Child Firearms Safety Act (the “bill”) is an inconsequential piece of legislation. Aside from the significant political impact of the bill, it carries little weight and makes little difference. Despite public misconceptions, the few benefits of the bill, notably the probable slight decrease in the number of childhood gun accidents, do not exceed the drawbacks, such as the inaccessibility of guns during a home invasion and loss of civil liberties. Therefore, unless some strong amendments are made to the bill, I recommend that you oppose the bill.
Try rewriting each to make it clearer and about 50% shorter; I give some possible answers in Appendix II.A.1, p. 353.
B. Editing for Concreteness
Consider also this paragraph; assume that it's the first paragraph in an article on laws prohibiting the wearing of masks in public:
The existence of antimask laws poses difficult questions of constitutional law. We know that the freedom of speech is one of our most cherished rights, especially when there is a danger that the free expression of unpopular speakers would be deterred by the fear of negative consequences. And yet the prevention of crime, including crime facilitated by the wearing of masks, must surely be ranked as one of the more compelling of the possible government interests. The public understandably wants to avoid the harm to property, persons, and the social fabric that may flow from such crime.
The purpose of the antimask laws, as the paragraph suggests, is to prevent crime: Anonymity can make it easier for people to get away with crimes; masks facilitate anonymity; so therefore banning masks should (at least in some circumstances) help prevent crime. On the other hand, some people will be reluctant to express unpopular views unless they can do so anonymously, so antimask laws deter some unpopular speech.
This paragraph is much better written than the preceding two—and yet it's still too abstract, and too full of unhelpful generalities. Rewrite it to make it more concrete, clear, and vivid. Feel free to cut material and add material, if you think that the changes will improve the paragraph. A possible answer is in Appendix II.A.2, p. 358.
XVII. USING EVIDENCE CORRECTLY
In trying to prove your claim, you'll use a lot of evidence—cases, statutes, historical facts, social science data, and so on. You