Imagine a world where Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) — the lifeblood of modern family court, civil court, and administrative courtrooms — is ripped out from under the legal system.

No more forced mediation. No more settlement conferences masking as justice. No more court-mandated “compromise” sessions while judges kick real trials down the road.

Just real law, real trials, and real constitutional standards.

If Trump, or any major political figure, truly dismantled the ADR empire that now defines our broken courts, the consequences would be immediate and hilarious (and ultimately necessary).

---

1. Judges Would Panic — Many Can’t Actually Apply the Law

Here’s the dirty little secret: Most modern judges, especially in family and civil courts, don’t actually know how to conduct real constitutional trials.

They’re trained to “manage cases,” “broker settlements,” and “process feelings.”

Without ADR, they’d have to:

• Hold actual trials.
• Apply real evidentiary standards.
• Protect constitutional rights with real scrutiny.
• Handle real objections.

Many would be exposed as glorified settlement brokers, not impartial referees of law.

And guess what? Real appellate scrutiny would come roaring back because no “private agreement” shield would protect sloppy judicial misconduct anymore.

Translation: A lot of “judges” would realize they can’t actually judge.

---

2. Lawyers Would Be Screwed Too — Especially Family Lawyers

The modern family lawyer doesn’t go to court to fight for you.

They go to court to “resolve conflict” — meaning, they push you into endless mediations, custody evaluations, parenting coordinators, and private deals that gut your rights.

Without ADR, they’d have to:

• File real motions.
• Argue real constitutional violations.
• Actually take cases to trial.

Most wouldn’t know how. They’d be exposed for selling expensive “guidance” without ever actually protecting client rights.

It would separate true trial lawyers from the glorified billable-hour therapists.

---

3. Massive Litigation Floodgates Would Open

Families and businesses could flood courts with lawsuits:

• Suing for due process violations.
• Suing for fraud on the court.
• Suing for unconstitutional mandates to “settle” outside of law.

Class actions could explode, challenging a decade (or more) of forced ADR processes that violated informed consent and constitutional guarantees.

Governments and courts would finally face real consequences for abandoning justice in favor of “case management.”

---

4. Massive Retraining Would Be Required

Judges and lawyers would have to:

• Re-learn constitutional law.
• Re-learn civil rights standards.
• Re-learn how to conduct real, impartial trials.

Law schools would need to pivot away from “conflict resolution” degrees and back toward litigation, constitutional rights, and evidence law.

Bar exams would tighten. Judicial appointments would demand real legal acumen again.

---

5. A New (Old) Era of Courts Focused on Rights Could Finally Begin

Without ADR dominating the landscape, courts could:

• Recenter around protecting individual rights.
• Refocus on evidence, not allegations.
• Stop allowing judicial “feelings” and “preferences” to override black-letter law.

We could (slowly) rebuild a system based on fairness, due process, and constitutional fidelity.

It would be ugly at first. But it would be worth it.

In Short:

Final Thoughts

Tearing down ADR wouldn’t just expose incompetence — it would expose the grand illusion:

Most of what passes for “justice” today is actually administrative facilitation, not constitutional adjudication.

The public would finally see it. The courts would be forced to reckon with it. And, maybe just maybe, real justice could be rebuilt from the ashes.