U.S. producer and writer Ryan Murphy has a penchant for glossy legal dramas, his latest being the Kim Kardashian-led All’s Fair. The Hulu series has received its fair share of criticism. Excuse the pun. Pop culture commentators call it the “most polarizing TV moment of 2025.” And we see why.
Besides the underwhelming script and overly dramatic performances, the courtroom scenes are hyper-stylized, making a mockery of the legal system. One might argue that Murphy’s brand of camp and parody is on point, yet it doesn’t excuse a flimsy attempt at portraying the legal side of things.
The issue appears to be a common thread in courtroom dramas, one that Hollywood continuously gets wrong.
Exhibit A
The Journal of Law and Society published a piece several years ago titled Law in Film: Globalizing the Hollywood Courtroom Drama.
Researchers asked why courtroom films made in Europe copy U.S. legal themes, and why the same American courtroom tropes consistently show up. They shape how the public thinks about justice, even though they rarely show how the law works.
Anyone who practices law can spot a long list of errors, and you don’t have to be a lawyer to notice the misdemeanors. Many individuals interested in law school tend to study a Juris Doctor (JD) degree. This is the standard graduate-level law degree in the U.S. and Canada.
An online JD lawyer degree is proving popular with online students who prefer not to relocate to college, and it’s more affordable than the traditional legal education route. Individuals gain practical legal training and learn in real-world legal settings.
Cleveland State University advises enrolling in an ABA-accredited online law school that can be completed in as little as three years and that prepares you for the bar exam.
Exhibit B
Practicing criminal law attorneys can’t help but watch courtroom dramas through a critical lens. The real challenge is when movies stretch the truth for entertainment purposes, and they become lore.
An apt example of this is the 1992 comedy My Cousin Vinny. Joe Pesci shines in his role. The movie might be one of the most accurate depictions of courtroom trials, but there’s one big discrepancy.
In one pivotal scene, the prosecution calls an undisclosed expert witness. Vinny objects, citing the failure to provide notice. The judge overrules his objection, an overruling which would never happen in a real courtroom due to the disclosure of expert witnesses.
This is a legal requirement under the rules of discovery in U.S. law. Both the prosecution and the defense are required to notify each other of experts they intend to call to the stand. The rule maintains fairness and allows adequate time to prepare rebuttals. If you’re interested in how real criminal laws operate beyond Hollywood scripts, you can read our detailed guide on Section 420 and real criminal procedure.
Exhibit C
The “pleading insanity” defense is a common plotline used for a climactic effect. But the inaccurate trope causes more harm than good, argue mental health experts.
When the courtroom gets the Hollywood treatment, it struggles with how it portrays mental health. Characters are shown as being violent or unhinged, further reinforcing stereotypes.
Firstly, the defendant should undergo a competency hearing. Secondly, the insanity defense is used in only 1% of cases. And, according to Justia, the ruling is successful in approximately 30 cases annually.
When Hollywood Gets It Right
Occasionally, when a writer and director does the research, magic occurs. Yardbarker reports that some of the best courtroom dramas demonstrate the humanity at the heart of complicated cases.
Chadwick Boseman was a hugely talented actor who brought real and fictional characters to life. In Marshall, he delivered a standout performance as Thurgood Marshall, focusing on the case State of Connecticut v. Joseph Spell.
The film shows how one moment in a person’s life can shape their future. It also gives viewers a glimpse of Marshall’s brilliant legal mind and how he would go on to become one of the most important figures in American law.
Closing Arguments
Authors Kevin Dwyer and Jure Fiorillo penned True Stories of Law & Order. During an interview with HowStuffWorks, they said that it’s common for jurors to enter the courtroom with convoluted ideas.
Their beliefs are influenced by dramatic courtroom movies and TV shows. They expect a big “Aha!” moment or a piece of evidence that suddenly proves everything. Some expect a confession on the witness stand, known as the Perry Mason Effect. Many legal misunderstandings come from movies rather than actual law. For example, everyday situations like helping an injured person also have strict legal guidelines — explained here: What you’re legally required to do before touching an emergency victim.
The point is that real-life court proceedings don’t follow the same script as Hollywood. Much of what you see on TV is made up and doesn’t exist. So the next time you settle into binging your next legal series, take it with a pinch of salt and a hearty dose of fantasy.
