This week: cold, hard cash for debt-laden prosecutors and public defenders; USA Today smacks down US Attorneys; legal services funding needed in the Lonestar State; four years in jail without a trial because the state can’t fund a public defense; LSC’s doing some financial oversight; law students aiding servicemembers who are about to be deployed (well done!); mandatory pro bono for Mississippi lawyers(?); legal services funding found for the Lonestar State (good timing!); national poverty data are out, and opponents of poverty are not going to like the news; the strain on legal services in Tennessee; LSC’s looking for a president; do prosecutors wield too much power at the expense of judges?   

• 9.23.10 – the Blog of the Legal Times reports that long overdue funds from the John R. Justice Act, a loan repayment program for prosecutors and public defenders authorized in 2008, will finally begin flowing to beneficiaries throughout the nation.

• 9.22.10 – USA Today has run an analysis piece – yes, its’ a USA Today story longer than two paragraphs! – on the state of ethics among federal prosecutors nationally, concluding that “prosecutors repeatedly have violated that duty in courtrooms across the nation. The abuses have put innocent people in prison, set guilty people free and cost taxpayers millions of dollars in legal fees and sanctions.”  Although acknowledging that the instances of misconduct or negligence are not broadly representative of the federal prosecution community, the story paints a picture of increasingly faltering work from prosecutors who are either overworked, under-supervised, or willing to break the rules in order to win.  (Also, Main Justice, an independent news organization which covers all things related to the Justice Department, picked up on the USA Today report.) 

• 9.22.10 – in the Cherokeean Herald of Texas, state supreme court justice Nathan L. Hecht reviews the recession’s impact on low-income Texans, highlights the dramatic declines civil legal services funding that limit providers’ ability to serve a swelling client base, and calls on the state legislature to once again appropriate funding in support of legal services.

• 9.21.10 – the Southern Center for Human Rights has run a piece by E. Wycliffe Orr, an attorney and former elected official in Georgia, about the alarmingly protracted murder prosecution of Jamie Ryan Weis in the Peach State.  Weis, who qualifies for indigent defense, has been incarcerated in a county jail for four years, largely on account of funding shortages that have prevented counsel from staying on to handle the complex case in its entirety.  He has attempted suicide three times while in jail.  After a great deal of litigation on the state level, Weis has appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking it to, in Orr’s words, “decide whether poor people accused of crimes have a right to continued representation once their lawyers are thoroughly familiar with their cases and attorney-client relationships of trust and confidence have been established. He also asked the Court to decide whether the State could pursue the death penalty even if it was unwilling to provide legal representation for the person whose life it seeks to extinguish.”  Orr has joined with other practitioners to file an amicus brief in support of Weis’s position.  The PSLawNet blog shed light on the Weis case in a post last May, and we followed up with more coverage in July (see item 4). 

• 9.21.10 – a press release from the Legal Services Corporation announces “members of a Special Task Force on Fiscal Oversight charged by the Board with reviewing LSC’s fiscal oversight responsibilities and how LSC conducts fiscal oversight of its grantees…. The Board approved the Task Force’s formation on July 21 and the above members were announced at the Board’s meeting today. Chairman Levi said he may announce a few additional members in coming weeks.  The Task Force’s report and findings are expected in the Spring of 2011. The Task Force will operate independently of LSC, but is authorized to conduct its work with any necessary support from the LSC staff and to engage consultants with the approval of the Board Chairman.”  LSC had been the target of a critical piece put out by the Center for Public Integrity on July 15, which questioned oversight of LSC funds once disbursed to grantee organizations.

• 9.20.10 – the Jacksonville Daily Record reports on two students at the Florida Coastal School of Law who successfully hatched a project to provide free legal services to military reservists preparing for deployment and trying to get wills, powers of attorney, healthcare and other issues squared away.  The project resulted in collaboration between Florida Coastal, the Jacksonville Bar Association, and Jacksonville Area Legal Aid, as law students and attorneys met with their clients at a free clinic held on the 9th anniversary of September 11th.  This is just one more example of work done by law students who themselves wish to serve current and former servicemembers.  For example, see the PSLawNet Blog’s story from last August about Project Salute, run by the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law.

• 9.19.10 – Mississippi’s Clarion Ledger reports on a proposal being considered by the state’s high court “that would require lawyers to provide at least 20 hours of free service to the poor each year.”  There is debate within both the Mississippi bar and the legal blogosphere (see this Wall Street Journal Law Blog post) about whether or not traditional volunteer service can/should be made compulsory.   This question stems from the release of a report, The Unmet Civil Needs of Low-Income Mississippians, by the Mississippi Access to Justice Commission.  The report outlined “difficulties people encounter in gaining access to civil legal representation….  Between a third and half of those who apply for legal aid are turned away….  About 550,000 poor people are eligible for services, and about 30 legal services attorneys are available in Mississippi.”   The mandatory pro bono requirement doesn’t appear to be a specific recommendation made in the report, but rather one among many options the Supreme Court is considering to narrow the justice gap.   Here’s a Clarion Ledger article on the report’s release. 

• 9.17.10 – a press release from the Texas Access to Justice Foundation trumpets good funding news: TAJF is among five other legal services organizations which will share in a $2.6 million cy pres award intended to benefit advocates for the disabled.  A recent PSLawNet Blog post provides more detail, and here’s coverage from the  San Antonio Business Journal and the Austin Business Journal.

• 9.16.10 – the Washington Post covers the release of census data showing that, in 2009, “the ranks of the American poor soared to their highest level in half a century and millions more are barely avoiding falling below the poverty line.”  One in seven people “lived last year in homes in which the income was below the poverty level, which is about $22,000 for a family of four.”  The article goes on to cover the political back-and-forth about government’s role and effectiveness in fighting poverty during a recession.  (Nothing like think-tank quotes to put things into perspective!).  Also see the PSLawNet Blog’s coverage of the new poverty data, with links to other news outlets.  Finally, the Legal Services Corporation issued a press release to put the data into context regarding civil legal services: “Nearly 57 million Americans now qualify for civil legal assistance from the Legal Services Corporation, an increase of 3 million from 2008, and the highest number of people eligible for legal aid in our country in the Corporation’s 35-year history. Of the 57 million, 19.6 million were children, the Census Bureau said.”  LSC will be lobbying Congress and entreating the private sector to provide funding and pro bono support.

• 9.15.10 – the Chattanooga Times Free Press runs a thorough story illustrating the strains on Tennessee’s civil legal services system as the number of potential clients increases but funding does not.  “It’s a dilemma that led the Tennessee Supreme Court to announce in late 2008 that fixing the state’s legal aid crisis would become its No. 1 strategic priority. The goal is the same in 2010, with the court recently declaring the lack of access to legal help ‘one of the most pressing issues’ facing Tennessee’s court system.”  The problem boils down to simple numbers; because of funding shortages there are not the means to hire the lawyers necessary to serve all potential clients who face dire legal problems.  “There are only 81 legal aid lawyers who work full time in one of Tennessee’s five legal aid centers. Twenty-seven work for Legal Aid of East Tennessee, serving a client base of 300,000 out of the approximately 1 million residents statewide whose low incomes qualify them for free legal help.  It means the state’s full-time legal aid lawyers every year wind up accepting only one in five cases brought by people seeking their services, a Tennessee Supreme Court study found.”

• 9.13.10 – the Blog of the Legal Times reports that the Legal Services Corporation’s search for a new president continues.  According to John Levi, the LSC board chair, “‘We’re looking for a lawyer who has first-rate management skills. But we’re also looking for someone who understands the needs that are out there and isn’t afraid of them,’ Levi said. ‘We view this is a great opportunity for the LSC.’  Levi said that the LSC search committee will likely draw about eight or 12 candidates from the pool of applicants and select the next president from there. He said he and the other board members would like to see a president in place by the beginning of next year.”

• 9.10.10 – in an Anchorage Daily News opinion piece, former Alaska attorney general John Havelock notes that prosecutors, who shoulder enormous responsibilities in the operation of the justice system, also have extraordinary power that can be dangerous to the system if it is unchecked.  Havelock supports political appointments of prosecutors rather than elections because “campaign contributions lay a hand on the scale of justice.”  He also supports “enhancing the discretionary power of the judiciary” so that prosecutors do not wield so much influence in all facets of criminal proceedings, from charging decisions through sentencing.

“What?” is what you’re asking.  We couldn’t think of a pithy blog title so we went with alluringly vague.

Penn State Law School is rolling out a TV series that will feature legal luminaries and human rights experts staging mock trials to introduce all kinds of audiences – from high-school students to practitioners – to some of the thornier human rights issues being debated today.

From the Centre Daily Times of central Pennsylvania:

Penn State Law School created the series in partnership with the School of International Affairs and Penn State Public Broadcasting. The goal is to stage mock trials that examine complex international human rights issues. The episodes will be broadcast by WPSU and available to schools around the world to use in their classes.

Penn State law faculty member Randall Robinson, creator of the show, said he thought it would be a good way to use compelling television to bring complex issues that aren’t closely followed by the general public to the public.

The idea is to present the program to juries around the world and promote discussions about the cases and the verdicts. Background information will be available on the Web, and plans are being developed to add educational material to the web-site that could be used in high school and college classes.

The pilot episode of “World on Trial” features Cherie Booth Blair (wife of former British Prime Minister Tony “Mr. T” Blair, and a renowned lawyer in her own right) as a judge, and Harvard Law Professor Charles Ogletree.  The trial focuses on whether a French ban on head scarves in public schools interferes with rights to free expression.

This sounds like a terrific idea to us, particularly if Penn State is able to develop supplementary educational resources that would aid younger students in following the issues at trial.

There was no Public Interest News Bulletin last Friday.  This is because the PSLawNet Blog observed the Labor Day long weekend by doing less labor.  But the Bulletin returns today with a special Interrogatory Edition.

This week: Why is it bad to be mean to opposing counsel?; Volunteer State pro bono – redundant?; legal services – to bundle or not to bundle?; do you know what an MLP is?; how do resource-strapped courts observe speedy-trial guarantees?; law students can’t pretend to be attorneys, but can they collect attorney’s fees?; how cold is stealing money from a legal services provider?; how cool an acronym is LOLLAF?;  where’s the best place to work in Uncle Sam’s bureaucracy?; how much poverty has the recession created?; are those pesky law school professors messing up legal education?; and finally, what’s shakin’ over at the ABA Division for Legal Services?

• 9.10.10 – the New Jersey Law Journal reports that a “New Jersey state appeals court on Wednesday overturned a conviction for attempted murder of a policeman, in part because the prosecutor’s persistent denigration of defense counsel could have swayed jurors. The comments ‘clearly suggested to the jury that defense counsel was inept,’ the Appellate Division said in State v. Bridges, A-0806-07.”  Among other remarks the prosecuting attorney accused the public defender – in front of the jury – of violating court rules, interrupted his summation several times, and repeatedly asked the defendant if he was a liar.  The appeals court noted that defense counsel did not object very often and, ironically, this gave more momentum to the aggressive prosecution and led to an imbalanced picture for the jury to view.  The court also found error in the trial judge’s jury charges.  The county prosecutor’s (Sussex) office has not yet decided whether to appeal the decision. 

• 9.8.10 – a blog on the Knoxville News Sentinel’s website reports on a new access to justice initiative:  “The Tennessee Supreme Court has established a program allowing retired attorneys to provide pro bono legal services as yet another step in the Court’s effort to improve access to justice in the state…. The pro bono emeritus rule gives retired attorneys the authority to perform all legal work, without pay, on behalf of a client. Pro bono emeritus attorneys may represent the client in court with the approval of the judge hearing the case.”  The state’s high court has done some heavy lifting lately on the access-to-justice front; for more check out item 10 in the PSLawNet Blog’s July 9, 2010 Public Interest News Bulletin.  It’s also noteworthy that a similar retired-lawyers-return-to-do-pro-bono-program was launched in New York State earlier this year.

• 9.8.10 – according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Cobb County is expanding attorney practice rules that permit limited scope representation, or “unbundled legal services,” so that more moderate-income individuals can afford the services of a lawyer for discrete undertakings – like a consultation or document preparation – when they could not afford the fees that would be charged for full-scope representation on a legal matter(s).  The article touches upon the fact that the recession has brought the debate about limited scope representation to the front burner because many more people find themselves with legal problems but without sufficient funds to pay for an attorney.  And outside of Georgia, “[t]he practice is popular in California, where there are continuing legal education courses for lawyers on the topic.  In Massachusetts, the state’s highest court last year expanded a trial program for limited scope representation to the entire state court system.”  The PSLawNet Blog has covered news on the limited-scope representation debate in other jurisdictions, like Arizona (item 5) and Michigan (item 7), and here’s a New York Times op-ed from the chief justices of California and New Hampshire arguing that states should consider limited-scope representation as one means to increase access to justice.

• 9.6.10 – the Jacksonville Daily Record reports on a success story emerging from the work of the Northeast Florida Medical Legal Partnership.  The NFMLP has teamed up with medical clinics that serve low-income patients in order to provide legal services for patients when necessary – such as appealing a denial of Social Security or medical benefits.  Cases that run through the NFMLP are taken by pro bono attorneys at firms of all sizes or by staff attorneys at Jacksonville Area Legal Aid.  As the PSLawNet Blog has noted before, medical-legal partnerships are increasingly popular because they afford professionals from these two disciplines an opportunity to holistically address their patients’/clients’ problems.

• 9.5.10 – Congestion in the courts!  The Press-Enterprise reports on a case in front of the California Supreme Court – People v. Engram – stemming from resource shortfalls and case backlogs in Riverside County trial courts – problems that exist in many other California counties as well.  The case could have an impact on “how courts statewide handle criminal cases on the verge of dismissal because of constitutional speedy-trial deadlines.”  After a long, winding adjudicatory path that included a conviction on a felony charge, a reversal, a retrial, a mistrial, and a stream of continuances on a third trial, a court ultimately dismissed the people’s case against Engram because it has reached a time deadline intended to guarantee a defendant’s speedy-trial right.  As it turns out, Riverside County has streamlined its docket system since the troubles at the center of this case took place.  As noted though, the underlying issue in the case could affect courts elsewhere in the state which are grappling with similar problems.

• 9.4.10 – the Palm Beach Post reports that, “In Florida, 12 men have been freed from prison since 2000 after DNA evidence proved their innocence, some after serving time on Death Row.  Now the Florida Supreme Court has ruled a legal system that allows such miscarriages of justice needs to be fixed. It has created the Florida Innocence Commission to learn what goes wrong and to propose reforms.  Florida becomes the 10th state to study the causes of wrongful convictions.”  The commission is being funded with an appropriation from the state legislature and a grant from the Florida Bar Foundation.  The commission “will not hear individual please from those who say they have been wrongly imprisoned,” but rather will explore the systemic causes of wrongful convictions.  That work is already underway, and according to the story, “Mistaken eyewitness identification is far and away the leading cause…” of wrongful convictions.

• 9.2.10 – from the National Law Journal, we learn that Washington D.C.’s highest (local) court delivered a favorable ruling regarding attorney’s fee awards for law school clinical programs last week.  Regarding an administrative matter in which two law students represented an individual whose disability benefits were terminated, the “…D.C. Court of Appeals ruled…that the Public Justice Advocacy Clinic [at George Washington University’s law school] was entitled to legal fees under a District of Columbia law pertaining to government worker disability cases. The court…found that the students’ work, supervised by George Washington clinical professor Jeffrey Gutman, did not amount to lay representation, which would have precluded recovery. The clinic sought about $6,400 in fees.”  The question in the case turned on whether a particular statute governing attorneys fees could apply to the work done by law students, who are by definition not attorneys.  “Because the students had worked closely with Gutman, a licensed attorney, the court found that awarding the fees was warranted.”  This decision is narrow because it deals with a particular statute, but this story makes the PSLawNet Blog wonder about case law in other jurisdictions on the question of law school clinic programs receiving attorney’s fees for cases handled by students.  If you have any insight on this topic, please offer it in the Comments section below.

• 9.2.10 – the Washington Post’s “The Crime Scene” blog reports that a former Maryland Legal Aid Bureau employee “admitted in court that he stole more than $1 million from the nonprofit organization.”  Over a 10-year period, MLAB’s former finance chief inflated “invoices for office supplies, then stole the excess money.”

• 9.1.10 – the Suburban Journals (St. Louis Metro Region) website offers a nice profile of Lois Wood, a longtime legal services attorney, and the organization for which she  currently serves as executive director, the Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation (LOLLAF) in southern Illinois.

• 9.1.10 – the Washington Post reports on the release of the “Best Places to Work” rankings of federal government offices, a report produced by the Partnership for Public Service and the American University School of Public Affairs.  Over a quarter of a million federal employees at 290 federal organizations participated in the survey process.   Here’s a link to a recent PSLawNet Blog post about “Best Places to Work”, and here’s a link to the report website itself.

• 8.30.10 – in a short, data-heavy piece, USA Today reports that, “Government anti-poverty programs that have grown to meet the needs of recession victims now serve a record one in six Americans and are continuing to expand.” Medicaid enrollment is up 17% since late 2007, when the recession began.  The number of food stamp recipients has grown by almost 50%.  Unemployment insurance benefits are going to four times as many individuals now compared to 2007.  And the Temporary Assistance for Needy Family (TANF) “welfare” rolls have increased by 18% in the recession.  Costs, of course, have risen as caseloads have expanded, and folks in Washington are debating how much strain anti-poverty programs can/should bear in light of federal fiscal woes.

• 8.30.10 –  the National Law Journal reports on a forthcoming law review article which argues that reforms in legal education may be hampered by the fact that the legal academy is still highly focused on scholarly research and not on teaching practice skills.  The PSLawNet Blog nicely summarized the article (if we do say so ourselves) in a post last week, and here’s a link directly the NLJ article.

• Summer 2010 Edition of ABA Dialogue – the Summer 2010 edition of Dialogue, the quarterly magazine of the ABA Division for Legal Services, is now available online.  it features several articles on IOLTA funding, pro bono news from around the nation, and pieces on medical-legal partnership and a project to aid military servicemembers. 

Do you  know a law student who has demonstrated an extraordinary commitment to public service?  Nominate him or her for the 16th Annual PSLawNet Pro Bono Publico Award! This Award honors students at PSLawNet Subscriber Schools who have made exceptional contributions to under-served populations, the public interest community, and legal education by performing pro bono or public service work.  Nomination Deadline:  Wednesday, September 15.

The award winner will be invited to Washington, DC to be honored during an Award Luncheon at NALP’s Public Service Mini-Conference on Thursday, October 21, 2010.

Anyone can nominate a student.  Nomination forms are available here.

The National Law Journal is covering a little bit of ruckus in the legal academy, raised by a forthcoming law review article entitled “”Preaching What They Don’t Practice: Why Law Faculties’ Preoccupation with Impractical Scholarship and Devaluation of Practical Competencies Obstruct Reform in the Legal Academy.” Georgetown Law adjunct professor Brent Evan Newton, the article’s author, argues that, “The academy — both in terms of its preparation of law students to enter the profession and the type of scholarship being produced by the professoriate — has lost its practical moorings.”  (The article will run in the South Carolina Law Review.)

The NLJ piece goes on to summarize Newton’s criticisms and calls for change:

The value that law schools place on publication of law review articles means that faculty members often focus more on scholarship than teaching, Newton wrote. Most law review articles are grounded in legal theory as opposed to practical legal issues….Many law schools have attempted to make their curricula more relevant by adding adjunct professors and clinical faculty, but Newton concluded that those efforts are not nearly enough.

…

[Newton] suggested that law faculties be divided into two tracks — research professors and teaching professors, both of whom would be tenure-track. Research professors would account for one-third of a faculty and would concentrate on “theoretical, interdisciplinary research and scholarship” and teach fewer classes. The remaining two-thirds would teach doctrinal, clinical and legal reading and writing courses. Teaching professors would have extensive practice experience and would be expected to publish articles less frequently than research professors.

Newton’s piece apparently refers to conclusions in the much-discussed Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching’s 2007 report on the pros and cons of the current legal education model.  That report, Educating Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law, in essence says that law schools do really well at teaching critical thinking skills, but don’t teach practical applications (i.e. legal practice skills) particularly well.  To boot, the larger moral implications of lawyers’ actions are sometimes downplayed in favor of students being taught to think dispassionately.  The report doesn’t read easily like a Harry Potter…er….Twilight…well, the PSLawNet blog has no idea which of these serials is popular nowadays, but it’s worthy reading for those who wish to plug into the increasingly robust conversation about how we should teach law students to be lawyers.

For what it’s worth, the PSLawNet Blog believes strongly in some reformation of legal education that would incorporate more experiential learning components.  Public interest experiential programs – clinicals, externships, pro bono programs and the like – could point the academy in the right direction.  It’s not often that public interest advocates on law school campuses get to say they’re ahead of the curve, but in this case we think it’s true.   Going to court and doing real work on behalf of real clients is what public interest students have always been doing to make themselves more marketable immediately after graduation.

Speaking of robust conversations, the super-exciting legal blogosphere is abuzz:

Are Law School Faculties Part of the Problem with Legal Education? (WSJ Law Blog)

A Skunk In The Ivory Tower (Simple Justice)

Law School and Lawyering: A Post by Kristen Holmquist (PrawfsBlawg)

Two-Track Legal Education Coming to a Law School Near You? (Legal Blog Watch)

We are curious about your thoughts . . .  Please share in our comments section.

This week:  Pro bono, Mick Dundee-style; exploring solutions to expand legal services in Mississippi; comparing public defenders and private defense counsel; Comcast shows a little  love ($$$) to a medical-legal partnership; a legal services hotline for California seniors loses funding; more on Missouri’s ailing public defense system; the wheels of justice turning in New Mexico; terrific legal work on behalf of veterans in Michigan; and two former Minnesota legal services lawyers form a for-profit firm, but work primarily with low-income clients. 

• 8.27.10 – Fallen behind on the pro bono scene Down Under?  Well, The Australian has a piece about new data from the country’s National Pro Bono Resource Centre. The data show that, just as in the U.S., large firms are making large pro bono contributions: “24 firms with more than 50 lawyers did 322,343 hours of pro bono work last financial year.  The resource centre did not provide costings, but a conservative hourly rate of $250 shows the firms gave away legal work worth at least $80m.”  Read the Australian’s article on the National Pro Bono Resource Centre’s new data.  The two reports which present the data are presently available on the Resource Centre’s homepage.  As an aside, the PSLawNet Blog met the Centre’s director, John Corker, a couple of years ago at a public interest conference in Minneapolis.  We sat next to him as he took in his first baseball game.  The PSLawNet blog explained the basics, and apologized for both the Metrodome and for the diabolical Red Sox Nation, which had overrun the place to see the visiting Sox.

• 8.25.10 – a short piece in Southern Mississippi’s Sun Herald notes that “A Mississippi Supreme Court committee has asked for public comment on proposals to improve poor people’s access to legal services.  Proposals under review call for making 20 hours of annual pro bono…service mandatory for Mississippi attorneys, raising to $500 the payments lawyers may make in lieu of doing pro bono work and increasing fees paid by out of state lawyers to $500 per case” in order to fund civil legal services.  The comment deadline is October 1.

• 8.24.10 – Miller-McCune reports on new research in the Journal of Criminal Justice: “A newly published look at Chicago-area courts finds that, when you consider the actual outcomes of judicial hearings, these underpaid and underappreciated attorneys do just as well as their private-sector counterparts.”  The study looked at a random sample of 2850 convicted felony defendants and compared outcomes – between those defendants who had public defenders and those who had private counsel – at four stages in their trials: whether bail was granted; plea-bargaining decisions; whether defendants ultimately served a jail sentence; and length of sentence imposed on those jailed.  There are “[t]wo important caveats” regarding the study: “The researchers did not look at convictions vs. acquittals. And they found that retaining a private attorney is apparently beneficial ‘for certain offenders and at certain stages’ of the process.”  [Tip of cap to the ABA Journal.]

• 8.24.10 – the Florida Times-Union reports that “Comcast has donated $15,000 to Jacksonville Area Legal Aid for its Northeast Florida Medical-Legal Partnership.”  The eight year-old Partnership has recently expanded to serve additional medical centers.

• 8.24.10 – according to the Senior Spectrum (a publication covering seniors’ issues in California): “After providing free legal advice to more than 100,000 callers over the past two decades, the California Senior Legal Hotline has been forced to suspend most service following the loss of all state and federal funds for its general statewide program.”  Seniors in Sacramento County will still be able to access the hotline for help on a broad array of issues, but those outside the county will have only limited access to hotline services.  The hotline program is seeking new funding sources.

• 8.23.10 0 – the Lincoln County Journal reports on Missouri’s indigent defense caseload crisis.  “Public defender offices statewide are seeing increasingly heavy case loads putting attorneys well over their monthly limits.”  District Defender Thomas Gabel, who oversees programs in Lincoln and Pike Counties, observed that “Missouri is ranked 49th out of 50 states for public defense funding and in the past decade the state has taken in 12 thousand additional cases a year with no additional funds.”  Also, on 8.21.10, KSPR in Springfield reported that “Missouri Auditor Susan Montee plans to review the state Public Defender Commission.”  The PSLawNet Blog has been covering this series of events; to track back to past coverage, begin with our 8/20/10 Public Interest News Bulletin.

• 8.21.10 – the Las Cruces Sun-News in New Mexico reports that, in spite of budgetary pressures on the prosecutor’s and public defender’s offices, and in spite of the public’s misperception – driven by television crime dramas – about how fast the wheels of justice should turn, the Do-a Ana County courthouse is moving with all deliberate speed in handling criminal matters.

• 8.22.10 – an Associated Press story on the Michigan Live website tells of the successes of Project SALUTE , a pro bono program housed at the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law that serves veterans with legal needs.  “Combined with the law school’s Veterans Law Clinic, the two UDM-run programs are designed to address the compelling needs of veterans around the state.  The programs focus on veterans’ federal disability and pension benefits through education, law student representation, and pro bono attorney referral.”  For more, see the PSLawNet Blog’s post yesterday which explores Project SALUTE and other efforts to help low-income vets throughout the country. 

• 8.21.10 – according to the Star Tribune in Minneapolis, two former legal aid lawyers formed their own law firm, specializing in “destitute and low-income clients.”  While some clients can afford to pay a little bit of money, the firm will also rely on a Minnesota program that “pays advocates to help low-income adults with the complicated paperwork to go through the [federal Supplemental Security Income application] process.”  It can be a win-win-win when a client is approved to receive SSI benefits: the client has increased income, the attorneys are compensated by the state, and the state will actually save money because the client’s move to a federally-funded support program will often take them off of the rolls of state programs. 

The University of Detroit Mercy School of Law is addressing the growing legal needs of low-income veterans with two programs – Project Salute and its Veteran’s Law Clinic.  These programs both focus on assisting veterans access federal disability and pension benefits through education, law student representation, and pro bono attorney referral.

The mission of Project SALUTE is to “hit the highways to provide priceless legal advice to low income veterans for free and teach students the invaluable lesson of using the law to serve.”  The work of the students, faculty, and staff of Project SALUTE is supported by a custom designed 31-foot Mobile Law Office, built and donated by General Motors.

Since 2008, the program has provided pro bono assistance to more than 800 veterans and trained more than 300 lawyers to serve as pro bono veteran advocates in Michigan.  In addition to serving Michigan veterans,  Project SALUTE has reached veterans in more than 13 states and 22 cities across the country.   This year more than 65 clinics for veterans have been held across Michigan, with 35 additional clinics scheduled to take place this fall.

The Executive Director of Project SALUTE, Tammy Kudialis, highlighted the changing face of the veteran community and the growing need for assistance.

“You may think of the Veterans’ Administration helping older veterans who served in Vietnam, Korea and even World War II, but Afghanistan is the longest running war in U.S. history.  More than 36,000 troops have been wounded in action (in Afghanistan and Iraq) and all those veterans need our help.”  Read more.

Read more about issues facing the veteran community.

Last week the good folks at the Law Librarian Blog posted about the availability of a free resource offering search tips for WestlawNext and Lexis users.  Here’s a link to Guides for WestlawNext and Lexis-Nexis Online Research, which is produced by the Law Librarian and the Director of the Legal Writing Program at the University of Akron School of Law.  It looks pretty good to us.  Detailed but well organized, and plenty of helpful screenshots…

Last week’s Public Interest News Bulletin covered an opinion piece from the Pro Bono Institute’s Esther Lardent which had run in the National Law Journal. Lardent argues that, now more than ever, law firm pro bono contributions are necessary to protect immigrants’ rights until larger-scale policy reform improves the system.

We are at a crossroads where immigration is the point of intersection for civil liberties law, racial discrimination and poverty law. This presents challenges, certainly, but it also offers an opportunity for collaboration in ways that haven’t been the norm. What we need to see, in the absence of sweeping policy reform, are lawyers coming together to preserve the rights of immigrants and to promote concrete change to immigration laws.

It would seem that the Washington & Lee University School of Law is thinking along the same lines.  The school announced last week that it is launching the Citizenship & Immigration Program, a component of its externship program which will allow students to represent those facing deportation, as well as individuals seeking asylum and refugee status.  The school’s announcement notes that, in light of stepped-up immigration enforcement efforts:

…[T]here is a fast-growing need for legal services for people facing immigration problems, especially in areas not accustomed to large immigrant communities like the Shenandoah Valley. However, due to restrictions put on legal aid offices in exchange for receiving federal funding, such providers do not assist with immigration cases. Now, Washington and Lee law students will get a chance to help fill this void through a new program launching this fall at the School of Law.The Citizenship and Immigration program will focus on resolving legal disputes related to immigration and naturalization. Students working in the program, which is part of the School’s general externship program and third-year curriculum, will represent individuals before the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Department of Justice in order to obtain immigration benefits such as permanent residence, citizenship, asylum, and relief from deportation.

Every summer, PSLawNet hires law students as part-time summer interns, who are also working at unpaid public interest placements. This summer we asked one of our interns to write about her summer work at Project Vote, as well as her plans for the future. Lauren Forbes is a rising 3L at American University Washington College of Law in Washington, DC, and she hopes to work in civil rights and voting issues.

Read about Lauren’s summer after the break!