The following letter was written by a subscriber to The Wall Street Journal:

The problems with our legal system go much deeper than irresponsible plaintiffs, amoral lawyers, and inept juries. The trouble is, our system of checks and balances has been corrupted; 100 percent of the executive, 100 percent of the judicial, and 43 percent of the legislative branches have been taken over by one group--lawyers. The Constitution charges Congress to ordain and establish the courts. It is no wonder it has created a system that maximizes the incomes of its own kind. The system is rigged to drag out cases that are billed by the hour or to find moochers and looters willing to bring huge civil suits against productive citizens and corporations in front of dumbed-down juries.

1. Do you agree or disagree?

2. Is it productive for the author of the article to have such a pessimistic view of the world? By asking this question, I am asking you to look a little closer at the specifics of what this article is saying. It is alleging that all attorneys are corrupt and that our Court system is entirely broken. Consider whether this is an extreme view and whether a more middle of the road view is more appropriate.

3. State what you would do to correct any problems with the Court system as set forth in the article.