“Judges as Persuasive Storytellers,” With U.S. Judge Stephanos Bibas [35:11-38:18]

And really, getting to see it from different people's points of view helps me to get out the parts that are even a little bit opaque. Next, read good stories. To tell good stories, it helps to read good stories. There are some excellent stories in the best opinions and briefs. So as an advocate, and now as a jurist, Chief Justice Roberts is a masterful writer. Take, for example, the way that one of his briefs introduces from when he was an advocate. A zinc mine at the center of an environmental dispute. And by the way, this case full of lots of technical environmental regulation. But the oasis introduced by this description in the facts, quote, for generations in Nupiat Eskimos, hunting and fishing into the long mountains in Northwest Alaska, had been aware of orange and red-stained creek beds in which fish could not survive. In the 1960s, a bush pilot and part-time prospector by the name of Bob Baker noticed striking discolorations in the hills and creek beds of a wide valley in the western to long. Unable to land his plane on the rocky tundra to investigate, Baker alerted the US Geological Survey. Exploration of the area eventually led to the discovery of a wealth of zinc and lead deposits. Although Baker died before the significance of his observations became known, his faithful traveling companion, an Irish setter who often flew shotgun, was immortalized by a geologist who dubbed the creek Baker-Spotted Red Dog Creek. So in just a few sentences, now Chief Justice Roberts presents an engaging and complete story. Through it, he gets the reader to care about the origins of the Red Dog mind, something that might otherwise be boring or technical. And he suddenly conveys the message that local and state officials have special knowledge about the mind, an idea that matters for his briefs core legal argument. Chief Justice Roberts thus shows us how legal writers can harness the power of a wealthful story. But it's also good to read non-legal writers. Reading Hemingway say reminds us how important it is to choose the right forceful verbs to make our points. Dickens portrays characters whom readers care about. Tom Walt lets his subjects hoist themselves by their own foibles. Of course, their genres are different, and their goal is not to leave the reader with a crisp rule of law. Still, we can glean lessons from them as we find our own voices. In some, from our earliest years, we humans learn from stories. We follow their characters and plot. We care if their details are convincing. Stories organize facts into coherent narratives that may make a point. Truth legal storytelling uses authority and reasoning differently from fiction. But it too can involve a protagonist, other characters, a plot, and a theme. That's an effective way to explain, persuade, and convince. I've argued that judges should write for our core audience, we the people. That means speaking through clear, concise opinions that tell intelligible stories. By honing that craft, we can better persuade and convince not only litigants of lawyers and other judges, but also the people that our judgments are fair, impartial, and solidly grounded in law. Thank you.