The Changemaker Lawyer: Innovating the Legal Profession for Social Change

The Changemaker Lawyer: Innovating the Legal Profession for Social Change

As lawyers today confront existential challenges to their profession, from globalization to technological change, they face demands to innovate. In a world of rapid change, individuals must have certain skills to succeed; they must be “changemakers.” Changemakers are individuals who harness innovation to solve social challenges, a notion arising from the global movement of social entrepreneurship that has captured the attention of sectors spanning international development and the business world. This Note argues that through their innovative work, “changemaker lawyers” present a new set of skills and concepts to support a struggling legal profession. They can serve as exemplars and guides for lawyers in an evolving profession, and the principles that undergird their work can provide significant advantages to the profession as a whole. Starting from the proposition that these changemaker lawyers exist, I conducted interviews with ten attorneys whose unconventional work or expertise embodies changemaker lawyering. Drawing on my interviews, I identify three key themes that changemaker lawyers appear to have in common: (1) they seek to overcome long-standing norms in the legal profession; (2) they design novel organizational structures that reflect their values, and (3) they create trans-disciplinary practices that bridge legal fields and sectors. I then suggest challenges that handicap changemaker lawyers. By proposing the idea of changemaker lawyers, this Note seeks to help create a new identity, unite a diverse community of advocates, and trigger a new movement in the legal profession.



More in this Issue

Presidential Obstruction of Justice

Federal obstruction of justice statutes bar anyone from interfering with official legal proceedings based on a “corrupt” motive. But what about the president of the United States? The president is vested with “executive power” which includes the power to control federal law enforcement. A possible view is that the statutes do not apply to the […]

Trademark’s Judicial De-Evolution: Why Courts Get Trademark Cases Wrong Repeatedly

Trademark law has de-evolved. It has transitioned from an efficient mechanism for ensuring competition into an inefficient regime for capturing economic rents. In this Article, I focus on the role that party self-interest has played in biasing the evolution of trademark law. This self-interest tends to lead parties to (1) challenge efficient legal rules and […]

Patriotic Philanthropy? Financing the State with Gifts to Government

This Article offers a positive and normative account of an important and growing trend: wealthy individuals are increasingly giving their money to the government to encourage the government to fund particular projects that these individuals want the government to pursue. Such gifts—dubbed “patriotic philanthropy” by one prominent donor—raise fundamental questions about the role that private […]

Debunking Pre-Arrest Incident Searches

The “search incident to arrest” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement permits officers to search a suspect upon making an arrest. It is the most commonly invoked justification for unconsented-to searches; indeed, incident searches far exceed searches conducted with a warrant. This seemingly straightforward exception has wilted in recent years as courts have done […]

Procedural Experimentation and National Security in the Courts

In the last fifteen years, individuals have brought hundreds of cases challenging government national security practices for violating human rights or civil liberties. Courts have reviewed relatively few of these cases on the merits, often deferring broadly to the executive branch on the grounds that they lack expertise, political accountability, or the ability to protect […]