WASHINGTON, JANUARY 30, 2009--In his new book, Life Without Lawyers: Liberating Americans from Too Much Law, Philip K. Howard argues that America's pervasive "hyper-legalism" has undermined our freedoms and hindered our ability to use common sense when making everyday decisions. On January 27,  Howard presented Life Without Lawyers at AEI.

Americans are "drowning" in law and losing their freedom as a result, Howard said. He pointed to teachers--a group he referred to as the "caste of the dispirited"--to illustrate how schools are confined by "legal shackles" and thus unable to maintain order and authority. Howard described the five-foot-long list of legal considerations needed to suspend a child from school and teachers' reluctance even to put an arm around a crying child. These senseless limitations, Howard argued, are commonplace examples of how the law has undermined the freedom to act reasonably and responsibly. It is ironic, he added, that President Barack Obama was elected on a "Yes We Can" slogan, when in fact, America's hyper-legalism and over-litigation have actually embedded in society a mantra of "No We Can't." Howard concluded his presentation by reminding us that it is not the law that makes things happen but rather people, and that the freedom for people to make their own decisions must be restored.

Former U.S. attorney general Dick Thornburgh lauded Howard for his "very sound thesis" and further corroborated the book's arguments with personal examples from his own career in public service. He cited the insurmountable bureaucratic obstacles he faced as undersecretary general at the United Nations and the difficulty he faced in revising the U.S. criminal justice code as attorney general. Thornburgh called on President Obama to use the vast network he created during the campaign to "put people in touch with the process" and act on Howard's recommendations.

Thornburgh was followed by George Washington University law professor and legal affairs editor of The New Republic Jeffrey Rosen, whose dissent was based on the idea that the law is not actually the cause of freedom's decline but merely a symptom. He questioned Howard's ambitious ideas for change by challenging his supposition that Washington is at the crux of the problem. The decline of freedom and distrust of authority are not unique to Washington, Rosen argued, but rather endemic in any modern, technology-driven democracy devoted to egalitarianism.  And although Howard is quick to blame Washington, Rosen asserted that Washington--and a renewed faith in its regulatory and administrative agencies--is and should be at the heart of the solution.

The last panelist, Judge Stephen F. Williams of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, interpreted Life Without Lawyers as a critique of the courts, which he said constitute a "primary and entirely justifiable target." Judge Williams agreed with Howard's central argument and claimed that hyper-legalism is "deadening American life" in serious and significant ways. But he criticized Howard's antagonism to "rights" as an overarching concept and argued that it is difficult to "articulate an intelligible rule" for determining, as Howard suggests in his book, what is "reasonable" and what is not. 

AEI's Christopher DeMuth concluded the panel with a few words about Philip Howard and his calls for regulatory overhaul: "He is rhetorically radical, but in practice, he is actually an incrementalist." DeMuth applauded Howard's goal to empower the American people and provided a single suggestion of his own: to take advantage of the crisis. "When there's a crisis, there are opportunities to do things that can't otherwise be done," DeMuth said.

--RIVA LITMAN

For video, audio, and more information, visit www.aei.org/event1875, or visit www.aeilegalcenter.org.

For media inquiries, contact Veronique Rodman at 202.862.4870 or vrodman@aei.org.

###