Russell Gold

I posted a draft of Look What You Made Me Do to @SSRN: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…. Forthcoming @WLULawReview. I argue that criminal procedure coerces defendants into embracing the narrative that their crime was solely their own bad choice.

@MikeJShowalter @OrinKerr For example, my forthcoming article cites about 275 sources. It has several statutory cites but still cites a significant number of journal articles and some books. I couldn’t have read all of those sources in 15 hours, let alone the sources I read that didn’t make the cut.

@MikeJShowalter @OrinKerr Nice to virtually meet you too. As you probably know, law review articles are supposed to engage with all of the relevant literature; that seems to me to far exceed what “well substantiated” might mean in other contexts. My guess is that that’s where we’re diverging.

An attorney writes to me about the mostly AI-written law review article he had accepted this spring, now forthcoming in the flagship law review of a Top 50 law school. A draft of the article is now up on SSRN. According to the attorney: " Last month I used Claude to assist in drafting a new article . . . . I drafted this article in about 15 hours. In 2022 I published an article of similar length that took around 150 hours." The attorney adds: "I used Claude the way I’d use a junior associate—as a first drafter, sounding board, and research assistant. Most of the article, including the entirety of the title, abstract, and intro, is mine from the keyboard up. And anything Claude contributed that made it to the final version is there because I reviewed it, agreed with it, and chose to sign my name to it. This is no different than how I’d review an associate’s draft and then take responsibility for the finished product." The attorney adds: "That first draft was by no means file ready, but it was better than what I would’ve received from the vast majority of BigLaw associates. I was blown away, and have since started my own appellate and litigation practice in an effort to replicate these productivity gains for client work." Your thoughts? I know the attorney's name, and the journal, and I have checked out the article, but I figured that, at least for now, I would hold that back.

👏

Important decision from the 10th Circuit on computer searches, suggesting new limits on the scope of computer search and seizure—at least in the CA10. And not only new limits, but no QI, at least in the 2-1 majority's view. ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/fil… #N There's a ton going on here, but brief recap: Police get warrant to enter home & search for evidence (including computers) of protester who attempted to assault officer during protest, arguing that there was likely evidence of the assault in the home, including on the protester's phone—and that could have been transferred to other computers in the protester's home. First warrant just allows seizure; second allows search; third allows obtaining contents Facebook account. No charges are ultimately filed, and the protester sues. Tenth Circuit, 2-1, holds: 1) No QI for officer as to the first warrant, as even if there was arguable PC as to cell phone, there wasn't even arguable PC to seize the bulk of the computers seized. (see tweet below for more, so I can add more screenshots)

I'm excited to report that the article that @leahanelson and I wrote, Fiscally Restraining Criminal Lawmaking, is forthcoming in the @WashULRev.

Kudos to this journalist for mentioning that this new law is obviously unconstitutional under existing Supreme Court precedent and situating it with similar efforts in other states. Reminds of me a great article Mridula Raman is writing on the topic. alabamareflector.com/2026/02/05/ala…

@david__simon That would be @UALawSchool. The faculty have had access for a while, and I’ve used it some. Students will get access very soon. @ProfArbel is probably your best source on the topic.

Are any law schools working with Harvey? I haven’t demo-ed it yet but am curious if schools are trying it out for students?

Increasingly loud drumbeat for Congress to amend §1983 to authorize civil suits against federal officials for civil rights violations. It’s a great idea and great policy, but I just don’t think DOJ would ever permit Congress to do it.

Fiscally Restraining Criminal Lawmaking is under submission. Please mention it to your favorite law journal editors. Or your least favorite. @leahanelson and I examine how legislative process could make costs more salient in criminal law, hopefully prompting better deliberation.

In so doing, criminal legal systems obscure the role of systemic forces and wildly divergent opportunities. Forcing people to falsely narrative their own story is troubling. Stifling individuals' stories also impedes counternarratives that could promote public safety reform.

My article Look What You Made Me Do is now published in @WLULawReview. It explains how criminal procedure conveys the message and coerces defendants to say that their crimes were simply bad individual choices: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…

I’m sitting with about 100 public defenders from every corner of the U.S. Blue states, red states. Large and small counties. You need to know something deeply disturbing.

If you were reconstituting the federal judiciary from scratch, would you choose for it to be wildly disproportionately composed of former prosecutors and other courtroom advocates for govt—with only a smattering of former courtroom *opponents* of govt? Man, I sure wouldn’t.

This systemic narrative obscures hugely important factors like trauma, addiction, poverty, and mental health challenges that make it harder for some people to comply with the law than others. It prioritizes feeling safe over being safe. It suppresses counternarratives.

I posted a draft of Look What You Made Me Do to @SSRN: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…. Forthcoming @WLULawReview. I argue that criminal procedure coerces defendants into embracing the narrative that their crime was solely their own bad choice.

Word is out! After 4 great years at Columbia, I'm returning to NYU as an associate professor of law, beginning July 1. The Science, Health & Information Clinic is coming to NYU with me! Excited to join one of the strongest law & tech programs in the country! Much more to come!

I’m excited to report that Look What You Made Me Do is now forthcoming in ⁦@WLULawReview⁩. I’m excited to work with editors from ⁦@wlulaw⁩. ⁦@UALawSchool⁩

@cynthia_godsoe Aww, thanks, @cynthia_godsoe.

Awesome title! And I’m sure insightful article too, knowing @ProfRGold

“Look What You Made Me Do” is currently under submission to law journals. In it I examine how criminal process flattens the complex narratives of crime into a simple story of defendants making bad choices. It sometimes coerces defendants into reciting this narrative too.