I would like to submit for your consideration and your ideas some thoughts as to the future direction that the ALImight take. Being recently retired has given me more time for reflection; these thoughts are proposed for constructive dialogue.

They may be summarized:

1. Mechanism for spot revision of Restatements, UCC, and model acts more often than every 20 to 30 years. Societal needs change rapidly and require more adaptable laws; an ALI process should be devised to consider selected major spot changes every five years or so. A half day could be included in the ALI program for this purpose every several years when needed.
2. Comparative and international notations to the Restatements and uniform laws. Global legal developments shed light on the adequacies and potentialities of the ALI formulations. They also reflect what is the law in cross-border transactions, even in United States courts. Revised UCCArticle 2 carries some annotations to the CISG, but these could be expanded and this style also could be used for the Restatements, even if labeled as tentative and informational only.
3. Study of whether statewide or federal enactment is preferable in regard to a number of subjects dealt with by the ALI. An inventory of such subjects and a discussion of each is desirable. ALI action may be unduly restricted by a wrongful classification of subjects as only state-law-oriented. It would also aid in deciding which subjects are proper for cooperative efforts with the NCCUSL and which are not and therefore should be pursued separately.
4. The proposal of vital small uniform legislation. Some important matters can be handled by succinct uniform laws; an example is the improvement of United States organ donor laws, which are obsolete and fall far behind those of other countries where this is facilitated by law.
5. Improvement of Legal Education. With all its members who have been through this, many members who are teaching, and all Deans as members, the ALI is in a position to work with others for improvements. The existing basic structure was set in 1923 by the ALI when the law was far less complex. Many ideas for discussion may be found in “Legal Education for the 21st Century” (1999).
6. Formulation of general policies regarding international dispute resolution. The expertise of the ALI in legal process and various dispute-resolution means could be used to formulate general guidelines for future international dispute resolution, without regard to past or existing problems. In the commercial realm, an International Commercial Court to deal with varying interpretations of international conventions (e.g., CISG) would be feasible. In the broader context, an international dispute procedure between nations with increased dialogue, neutral mediation and arbitration, and separation of the functions of prosecutor, judge, jury, and enforcer, would be useful for all. Usually there are better ways of solving disputes than war. The ALI was active in an International Human Rights project in the 1940s; an international dispute settlement model would be within the ALI scope.

I believe that if The American Law Institute acts in these regards, it can continue to be a vital force in American law.

Respectfully submitted,

Donald B. King
Professor of Law Emeritus
Saint Louis University School of Law
ALI Life Member