There needs to be serious discussion in society and the legal community, about the deliberate "weaponization" of legal actions. Where the purpose is not to pur

There needs to be serious discussion in society and the legal community, about the deliberate "weaponization" of legal actions. Where the purpose is not to pursue a legitimate and balanced complaint, but rather to cow another party into compliance/cooperation by threat to destroy them through legal actions rather than the outcome of a legal process. The threat of forcing the other person to spend themselves into bankruptcy, for example. Standards need to be defined and enforced, where such activity is grounds for punishment up to and including disbarment. To the extent such already exists, it is clearly proving insufficient. Law should be about justice, first. Not just another field of unfettered warfare. Also, to that end, sealed records and confidentiality should be more severely constrained. The judicial system is a public system; everyone should be able to see what you're up to in it, for better and for worse. Protecting clearly threatened victims, sure. Defined legitimate, critical secrets, for defined limited periods of time, ok (real national security, trade secrets). Beyond that, not so much. Not at all, maybe.