Here is the lawyer-judge hypothesis in a nutshell: if there is a clear advantage or disadvantage to the legal profession in any given question of law, judges will choose the route that benefits the profession as a whole.1 In support of this hypothesis I offer examples drawn from multiple, distinct areas of the law. In so doing I hope to establish the accuracy of the theory and its far-reaching consequences. As a bonus, I also offer a single explanation for a series of puzzling legal anomalies.