Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters
Abstract
In December of 2015, yet another set of discovery rule amendments that are designed to limit discovery will go into effect. This article argues that the consistent pattern of discovery retrenchment is no accident. Rather, a combination of forces is at work. The Supreme Court consistently signals its contempt for the discovery process, and the Chief Justice’s pattern of appointments to the Rules Committees skews toward Big Law defense-side lawyers and judges appointed by Republican Presidents. In addition, longstanding corporate media campaigns have created and reinforced an anti-litigation narrative that, through the power of repetition, dominates public discourse. Further, predictable cognitive biases take this blend of politics, elite and often defense-side experience, and corporate manipulation of public opinion and blind the Rules Committee members to the possibilities of solutions that expand rather than contract information sharing. This article considers these phenomena, and recommends more heterogeneous committee membership, the use of deliberative processes that are more likely to overcome flawed heuristics, and greater reliance on non-opinion-poll data in the rulemaking process.
Publication Title
DePaul Law Review
Document Type
Article
Keywords
discovery, federal rules of civil procedure, amendment, cognitive bias, Supreme Court, civil procedure
Recommended Citation
Elizabeth G. Thornburg, Cognitive Bias, the 'Band of Experts,' and the Anti-Litigation Narrative, 65 DePaul L. Rev. 755 (2016)
