3 ms·

This doesn't convince me, because 1) in the real world there are often major monetary asymmetries in law, meaning one team has access to much more lawyers' time

This doesn't convince me, because 1) in the real world there are often major monetary asymmetries in law, meaning one team has access to much more lawyers' time 2) your example is mostly irrelevant since it's not like the lawyer was a defense attorney, she voluntarily wrote an oppressive law and then spent much of her time afterwards defending/upholding it. If you read the article you see that not only did she write the law, the Bush administration gave her major credit for leading the patriot act project. How is that at all similar to playing devil's advocate?

btown 8y ago
There is also the argument that the PATRIOT Act was flawed not for its stated intent, but for the nuance (or lack thereof) of its implementation. And the designer of the bill is the one responsible for said nuance, especially considering that she designed it at a time when it would have been political suicide for many lawmakers to oppose it for its nuance. She could have taken the opportunity to create something in keeping with civil liberties, and instead she did quite the opposite. Absent additional context, it is very reasonable to expect her to disregard civil liberties in the remainder of her career.