A fascinating detail about being a student is the awareness that one’s perspective is widening. On one hand, you may know the shape of what lies ahead on your learning journey. You have a map. You’ve talked to other travelers. You’ve heard about the destination. There are enough reasons compelling you to go that you’ve packed and embarked on the journey. But no matter how prepared you are—or think you are—nothing is the same as actually walking that trail and finding your own personal understanding along the way.

I am finding this truer as a law school student than during any other stage of my personal or
professional education. And I am deeply curious: Is the amount of national legal activity,
attention, and challenge appearing in American news today “normal?”

It would be silly to think that my own perceptions and awareness aren’t changing. One
reason I’ve always been drawn to law is the general understanding that it supports our
society at large. I find it both profound and fascinating to be able to directly identify my
doctrinal subjects throughout everyday life. (Sure, we have protections, but what is an
unreasonable search or seizure anyway? Also, contracts are everywhere.)

Still, there has been a major surprise. I thought most of the interesting landmarks along this
hike were going to be visible from the trail towards legal education. I expected that a steady
focus on legal areas of concern was natural for those who have either already reached my
destination, or who picked up the right tools or interest along the way to know how to look
for it. Instead, there seems to be a bombardment of legal issues and questions to the broader public on a near daily basis. Headlines are plentiful, grandiose, and looming trailside. No need for binoculars to glean legal news—events are being broadcast on billboards that rise higher than the forest I’m hiking through.

On one hand, I’ve heard it said that each generation faces its own wave of major issues and
social concerns. It can be natural for one to think the present day is “the worst it’s ever been.” But at the same time, I struggle with reactions to warning signs that seem to be dismissive.

The news broadcasts several iterations of “showdowns” between our judicial and executive
branches. Topics at issue include immigration, access to information safeguarded by legislative branches, and DEI. To my only partially-trained eye, there seem to be tactical
attempts by one branch to reach a particular goal that could jeopardize the entire system.

A micro example presented itself over a weekend. I started assigned reading for my
upcoming Professional Responsibility Course, which includes my first foray into the 2024
American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct. The preamble introduces
the responsibilities of a lawyer to uphold the legal process alongside their duty to challenge.
A sentence I would not have dwelled on previously is the guidance to “demonstrate respect
for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public
officials.” (Dzienkowski, John S. Dzienkowski's Professional Responsibility, Standards, Rules,
and Statutes, 2024-2025. Available from: West Academic, West Academic Publishing, 2024.)
I recall reading a month ago about the Justice Department’s attempts to circumnavigate a
federal judge’s response requirements to, and oversight of, an immigration issue. (Feuer,
Alan. “Administration’s Details on Deportation Flights ‘Woefully Insufficient,’ Judge Says.”
New York Times, March 20, 2025. Later this weekend, I catch up on news and encounter the headline, “Attacks on Judges Undermine Democracy, Warns Justice Jackson.” (Pérez Sánchez, Laura), New York Times, May 1, 2025

Returning to metaphor, I am eagerly packing my gear for the next leg of my hike towards my legal education. Map forgotten in my hand, I stare up at a trail-side landmark visible to the untrained eye from miles away from this hiking path. A quote shared by one of my professors rolls through my head; I think of John W. Davis’s commentary on the role of lawyers, in that “we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men’s burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful lives of men in a peaceful state.”

All I know is that certain calls to action now resonate more than I could have imagined. The
ABA’s Model Rules clearly present the indispensability of the public’s knowledgeable confidence in the justice system and law. Lawyers must act to support the public’s understanding, because “legal institutions in a constitutional democracy depend on popular participation and support to maintain their authority” (Dzienkowski, John S. Supra). I embrace that I don’t yet have the years of experience and awareness to properly contextualize the current moment. I can only ask—is this normal?