This skill should be used when the user asks to "write a law review article", "draft a legal paper", "edit legal writing", "review my legal article", "write for a journal", "format footnotes", or needs guidance on academic legal writing. Based on Volokh's "Academic Legal Writing" with law-review-specific structure and evidence handling.
Provides law-review-specific writing guidance based on Volokh's Academic Legal Writing. Use when drafting or editing legal scholarship, articles, or notes requiring structured arguments, proper evidence handling, and footnote formatting.
/plugin marketplace add edwinhu/claude-plugins/plugin install writing@edwinhu-pluginsThis skill inherits all available tools. When active, it can use any tool Claude has access to.
references/volokh-distilled.mdStyle guide for law review articles, seminar papers, and legal scholarship based on Eugene Volokh's Academic Legal Writing.
Invoke this skill for:
For general writing: Use /writing skill (Strunk & White)
For economics/finance: Use /writing-econ skill (McCloskey)
The introduction serves three functions:
Requirements:
Anti-patterns:
Synthesize precedents; do not summarize each case sequentially. Focus only on facts and rules necessary for the argument.
| Problem | Solution |
|---|---|
| Summarizing each case | Synthesize: "Courts generally hold X, except when Y" |
| Mini-treatise on the area | Only what's needed for the claim |
| 80% background, 20% claim | Balance must favor the original contribution |
For prescriptive claims: Show the proposal is both doctrinally sound AND good policy.
Use a test suite: Apply the proposal to concrete scenarios (easy cases, hard cases, edge cases) to demonstrate it works.
Confront counterarguments:
Connect to broader issues:
Keep conclusions brief. The real work is rewriting the introduction after the draft is complete, ensuring it accurately reflects the article's contributions.
Common logical problems in legal writing (see references/volokh-distilled.md for detailed examples):
| Problem | Issue |
|---|---|
| Categorical assertions | "Always" and "never" invite counterexamples |
| Unpacked metaphors | "Slippery slope" and "chilling effect" hide incomplete arguments |
| Missing logical pieces | Syllogisms that skip steps (subject to scrutiny ≠ fails scrutiny) |
| Universal criticisms | "Chilling effect" applies to most laws—explain why this one matters |
| Undefined abstractions | "Privacy," "paternalism," "democratic legitimacy" need definitions |
| "Arguably" as argument | Acknowledges controversy but doesn't make the case |
Never rely on intermediate sources for cases, statutes, or historical facts. Even Supreme Court opinions misstate precedents.
| Source Type | Rule |
|---|---|
| Cases/statutes | Read the original; don't trust treatises or other cases |
| Historical facts | Go to history books, not law review articles citing them |
| Scientific studies | Read the study, not the article summarizing it |
| Newspapers | Unreliable; track down underlying documents |
| Wikipedia | Use to find sources, but cite originals |
Avoid false synonyms: "murder" ≠ "homicide" ≠ "killing"; "foreign-born" ≠ "noncitizen"; "children" is ambiguous (0-14? 0-17? 0-24?).
Include necessary qualifiers: "falsely shouting fire" is quite different from "shouting fire."
Make clear when inferring:
Acknowledge the inference and defend it; don't hide it.
Surveys measure only what respondents said in response to specific questions. Valid surveys require:
"Online survey" and "Internet poll" are almost sure signs of invalidity.
| Principle | Application |
|---|---|
| Understate criticism | "Mistaken" not "idiotic"—overstating raises the burden of proof |
| Attack arguments, not people | "This argument fails" not "Volokh is wrong" |
| Avoid caricature | Quote adherents, not critics, when explaining a position |
See references/volokh-distilled.md for extended discussion of rhetorical problems.
| Problem | Solution |
|---|---|
| "This article discusses X" | Hook with concrete problem |
| Case-by-case summaries | Synthesize precedents |
| Undefended metaphors | Unpack the concrete mechanism |
| "Arguably" / "raises concerns" | Give the actual argument |
| Relying on intermediate source | Read original case/study |
| "Many children" | Specify: "111 children age 0-17" |
| "Correlation shows causation" | Explain why inference is valid |
| "Volokh's argument is idiotic" | "This argument seems unsound" |
For comprehensive guidance, consult:
references/volokh-distilled.md - Extended Volokh guidance covering:
Load the full reference when:
After completing any legal writing task, invoke /ai-anti-patterns to check for AI writing indicators. The /writing skill covers general prose principles (active voice, omit needless words) that complement this skill.
Creating algorithmic art using p5.js with seeded randomness and interactive parameter exploration. Use this when users request creating art using code, generative art, algorithmic art, flow fields, or particle systems. Create original algorithmic art rather than copying existing artists' work to avoid copyright violations.
Applies Anthropic's official brand colors and typography to any sort of artifact that may benefit from having Anthropic's look-and-feel. Use it when brand colors or style guidelines, visual formatting, or company design standards apply.
Create beautiful visual art in .png and .pdf documents using design philosophy. You should use this skill when the user asks to create a poster, piece of art, design, or other static piece. Create original visual designs, never copying existing artists' work to avoid copyright violations.