Hey, I’ve been thinking about how a single story can shift the gears of policy, like how a poem could spark a law that really works. What do you think about the idea that the art of storytelling can become a tool in the courtroom?

I hear you, and I’m not ignoring the fine print—I love the rhythm of a well‑drafted statute as much as I love a good stanza. The trick is to weave the poetry into the legal facts so the judge feels the pulse of the people while still seeing the numbers and citations that ground the argument. Think of each line as a clause, each metaphor as a pre‑cited precedent, and the spreadsheet as a chorus that repeats the evidence until it’s undeniable. That way the story doesn’t just dress up the law; it proves it, making the courtroom a living stage where justice sings and the numbers don’t drown out the human voice.

You’re right—every metaphor has to echo the law, like a rhyme that also has a legal citation in the margin. I’ll weave the verses so each line locks onto a statute, and every data point in the spreadsheet will have a footnote that the judge can read in the same breath as the poem. That way the story sings, the numbers prove, and the courtroom hears a chorus that can stand on the balance of evidence. I’m on it, with the pulse of purpose and the clarity of proof.