The MIT study sheds light on the convoluted nature of legal language, particularly its tendency to include long definitions embedded within sentences, which makes comprehension challenging. The research involved non-lawyers creating legal texts, revealing that such 'center-embedding' is a common practice. Critics argue that legalese is an outgrowth of tradition and serves more as a protective mechanism for legal professionals rather than as clear communication. The conversation highlights the structural complexities of legal texts and raises questions about the efficacy and transparency of legal language, suggesting that it often obscures rather than clarifies meaning for the average citizen. While there are calls for simplification, particularly through Plain Language initiatives, the entrenched habits and norms of legal writing remain significant barriers. Current discussions also suggest a need for a reevaluation of legal drafting practices and broader access to legal information.