[valleyer]

The law applies to everyone, so it's reasonable for everyone to try to understand it, not just attorneys.

Similarly, it's fine for people to have opinions on food, dental hygiene, and the tax code without being a chef, a dentist, and an accountant.

[rapidaneurism]

I thought it was illegal in new york (and probably the rest of the us) to give legal advice if not a lawyer.

And in my understanding interpreting the law as opposed to just reciting it constitutes legal advice.

[valleyer]

No, merely analyzing or discussing the law generally does not constitute the practice of law. If it did, plenty of newspaper articles, law review journals (often written by law students), non-attorney legal aid, and legal pamphlets would be prohibited.

If you want something more concrete, I googled it, and in New York, there appears to have been a case New York County Lawyers’ Association v. Dacey, in which Dacey wrote a book "How to Avoid Probate!", and the NYCA accepted a dissent in a lower court, stating in part:

    Does the writing, publication, advertising, sale and distribution of "How To Avoid Probate!" constitute the unauthorized practice of law within the meaning of subdivision B of section 750? It cannot be claimed that the publication of a legal text which purports to say what the law is amounts to legal practice. And the mere fact that the principles or rules stated in the text may be accepted by a particular reader as a solution to his problem does not affect this.

and later humorously quoting:

    "[I]t is a prized American privilege to speak one's mind, although not always with perfect good taste, on all public institutions" (Bridges v. California, 314 U. S. 252, 270)

https://accessiblelaw.org/Disclaimer.html

[kennywinker]

Pot, meet kettle.