It occurred to me this morning that because you are dealing with a serious topic/category, it might be smart to eschew humor and really try to penetrate what’s at stake in a mere two paragraphs—making the legal stakes apparent to the layman. It would take the form—so vital to our enterprise—and employ it in a strong, fresh way. You: Bang, Pause, Bang. Reaction: oh, I get it now, that means this…The occasional jocularity will sneak in, of course, and be a welcome departure. What do you think? It’s hardly an easier assignment—probably harder, but maybe more interesting. (Not to mention a better advertisement for your services.)
My other possibly worthwhile thought was in terms of approach. You could handle mostly big decisions from big courts—Supremes, 9th Circuit, etc.—always on the newsy edge. Or, you could approach the category by considering first topics/subjects that interest you, say, individual freedoms or corporate governance or what have you—and then finding decisions, even small local ones, that speak to the subject, that give it a twist or are unusual in some way. Both are interesting, I think, and may go well mixed together? (I speak with perfect naivete, not knowing how difficult research for the latter might be.)
