By Jamie Bence

Today on the American Constitution Society’s Blog, more information about the probable impact of proposed cuts to LSC funding. Corey Shdaimah writes, based on his experience interviewing legal services attorneys and clients:

In the flurry of budget discussions and funding cuts, money to the Legal Services Corporation is again on the chopping block, estimated to result in turning away 235,000 people across the country. This comes when estimates already show that for each eligible client served, another is turned away from LSC-funded programs and at least 80% of civil legal needs go unmet. Legal services for low-income clients are no luxury; they are often necessary to ensure basic survival. Funding cuts such as these always come at a time when such services are most needed. If we can shore up corporations and financial institutions, why can’t we shore up people, communities, and their faith in our legal system? In the U.S., access to justice without lawyers is largely a hollow promise.

For the complete post and more information on Shdaimah ‘s Negotiating Justice, please click here.

By Lauren Forbes

In 1998 law professors Keith Findley and John Pray founded the Wisconsin Innocence Project at the University of Wisconsin Law School.   Madison’s Capitol Times reports that since then, with the help of law students, the project has reviewed thousands of cases, helping to free 16 people who were imprisoned for crimes they didn’t commit.

Aside from freeing the innocent, Findley, a former public defender, is  working with the state Legislature to improve compensation and services for those freed after spending years, sometimes decades, behind bars. Currently, Wisconsin offers $5,000 for each year of wrongful imprisonment with a cap of $25,000. One bill, introduced by Republican Rep. Richard Spanbauer with bipartisan support, would raise that to $15,000 a year with no cap. Democratic Rep. Mark Pocan is preparing another bill that would increase monetary compensation to $50,000 a year, the federal standard, and provide an array of housing, education, workforce development, mental and physical health care and other services.

In an interview with Keith Findley, the Capitol Times delved into the core issues that lead to wrongful convictions and the work they’ve been doing for thirteen years.  Here’s a teaser…

Capitol Times:How much does DNA factor into the cases you take on?

Keith Findley: We don’t rely only on DNA, but DNA is what made the whole innocence movement possible, because before that there was sort of a general sense both in the legal community and in the broader community that while mistakes were inevitable occasionally, they were truly aberrant and anomalous and, as such, of little concern.

By Jamie Bence

Last week, Legal Services Corporation (LSC) released its 2010 Annual Report, detailing the growing need for legal services in the wake of the recession, and difficult choices made by providers facing diminished resources:

The future is brighter for the millions of Americans who have been served by the 136 nonprofit civil legal aid programs that are funded by the Legal Services Corporation.  These LSC program closed more cases in 2010 than the year before, and their casework reflected our nation’s slow recovery from the
economic downturn. Matters involving foreclosures, landlord-tenant disputes, unemployment, bankruptcy and consumer finance, and, sadly, domestic violence all increased in 2010 compared to the previous year.

At many LSC-funded programs, cases related to the economy have increased for three consecutive years. During this period, Congress provided LSC with budget increases, with the Corporation receiving $420 million in funding for Fiscal Year 2010.

Still, the number of Americans living in poverty and eligible for LSC funded services continues to grow, and many LSC programs are unable to meet the legal needs of those who sought civil legal assistance. Despite a 7.7 percent rise in LSC funding in 2010, significant sources of non-federal funding were essentially flat or declined, constraining the expansion of legal assistance.

LSC President Jim Sandman described the importance of finding innovative solutions in difficult times:

Collaboration across the access to justice community is particularly important in an era of reduced resources and increased demand for civil legal services. By coordinating with and reaching out to others, I hope to increase the efficiency of service delivery to clients, avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, and streamline LSC’s dealings with the programs it funds.

As Congress considers another round of cuts to LSC funding, the report underscores the growing need for legal services.  Read the complete report here to learn more about LSC’s outlook.

By: Steve Grumm

Wow, it’s hot.  That’s about all I can muster for a greeting this morning.  This week’s Bulletin includes news running from legal services funding hither and yon to volunteer federal prosecutors in New Jersey to “Courtmageddon” in the Bay Area.  There are a couple of news items out of Chicago, which may or may not have been included because they would give me an opportunity to note that the Glorious Philadelphia Phillies Baseball Franchise marched into Wrigley Field and took 2 of 3 from the Cubbies this week.  And hello to my friends at the Chicago Bar Foundation!  Well it turns out I could muster a proper greeting after all.

This week: the Texas legal services community gives props to those who went to bat for state funding; don’t run, walk to benefit Chicago Volunteer Legal Services!; speaking of the Windy City, a look at the work of the Legal Aid Bureau; Minnesota’s 2012-13 budget plan a mixed bag for public interest lawyers; Uncle Sam is recruiting volunteer federal prosecutors?; Lone Star pro bono; the proposed 26% drop in LSC funding is “cutting to the bone”; speaking of funding, it’s tough times for Garden State legal services programs; a North Carolina county cuts funding to an “aggressive” legal services program; “Courtmageddon” in San Francisco; how will LSC cuts impact Western Michiganders?; some legal services shuffling in Louisiana.    

• 7.21.11 – From a press release entitled Texas Access to Justice Commission and Foundation Applaud the Texas Legislature for Providing Funding for the State’s Legal Aid System: “In a tremendous show of bipartisan support, the Texas Legislature has appropriated $ 17.5 million for civil legal aid and $7.6 million for county indigent defense programs in general revenue during the recent Special Session. Gov. Rick Perry signed Senate Bill 2 that included an amendment for funding civil legal services on July 19.  This funding makes up for the $20 million awarded in the 2009 Session to mitigate the decline in interest on lawyers’ trust accounts (IOLTA) funds, a primary source of funding for legal aid. IOLTA funding has declined more than 75 percent since 2007.”

• 7.20.11 – when it comes to record-setting heatwaves, the biggest concern among public interest lawyers is typically the health of elderly, low-income clients who may not be able to stay cool at home.  But the heat can affect the public interest community in other ways.  To wit (and on a lighter note): with Chicago temps exceeding 100 degrees, “[o]fficials on Wednesday made the decision to turn [the 18th annual Race Judicata 5K fundraiser] into a walk, with food and beverages served before and throughout the untimed ‘race,’ due to concerns over high heat.   Proceeds from the event benefit the Chicago Volunteer Legal Services Foundation, Chicago’s first and pre-eminent pro bono provider of free civil legal aid to citizens with financial need.”  Race Judicata took place yesterday, 7/21.  Kudos to the participants, and here’s to your continued hydration!  (Report courtesy of NBC Chicago.)

• 7.20.11 – more Chicago.   WGN News highlights the work of the Legal Aid Bureau of Metropolitan Family Services, including LAB’s work today and the many changes that Chicago’s legal aid movement has spawned, both on the criminal and indigent defense fronts.

• 7.19.11 – Minnesota’s FY 2012-13 budget plan (which characterized as a “working agreement” between the governor and state legislators), is a mixed bag for public interest lawyers.  According to the Twin Cities Daily Planet (great name!), civil legal services funding would be cut.  “State funding for civil legal services has already fallen below 2006 levels. The working agreement cuts civil legal services by nearly $2 million in FY 2012-13, or seven percent…”  On the other hand, courts and public defenders will see a funding boost.  As to defenders: “There is a $2.5 million increase, or two percent, in funding to help address a deficiency in public defenders, who represent low-income clients in criminal cases. Past budget cuts have taken a significant toll – in half the state’s counties, there no longer are sufficient attorneys on staff to represent clients at their first court appearances.”

• 7.18.11 – volunteer AUSAs?  United States Attorneys are getting creative in the midst of a DOJ hiring freeze.  From the New Jersey Law Journal: “Newly announced openings at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Jersey could provide valuable experience and serve as a resume booster, but there’s one thing they won’t provide: a paycheck.  The office on Wednesday posted the job openings in Newark and Camden for uncompensated ‘Special Assistant U.S. Attorneys,’ following the recent example of other offices across the country….  The full-time positions — for which the office requests a one-year commitment — are open to newly minted lawyers and those wrapping up judicial clerkships… Ineligible are attorneys who were deferred by but received a payment from a law firm, as well as those who will be receiving any sort of compensation from a firm during the unpaid employment period.”  And here’s an interesting twist: “…[S]pecial assistant hires will not necessarily have an advantage in seeking a job with the office. In fact, they are prohibited from applying for any position in the office that might arise during the unpaid employment term.  That restriction was put in place so that candidates who can financially afford to take on the unpaid position ‘don’t necessarily get an immediate advantage’ over outside candidates.”  The piece notes that U.S. Attorneys in Connecticut and Pennsylvania have also posted for volunteers.  Here’s some more coverage from Main Justice.

• 7.18.11 – a piece in the Texas Lawyer highlights some of the Lone Star State’s all-star pro bono firms, namely Akin Gump, Fulbright & Jaworski, Hunton & Williams, and Weil Gotshal.  As for pro bono among Texas’s large-law firm community more generally: “The State Bar of Texas and the American Bar Association recommend that attorneys donate 50 hours each year to pro bono activities. Twenty-two of the largest firms in Texas provided Texas Lawyer their pro bono statistics for 2010. The 22 firms had an average full-time equivalent (FTE) Texas attorney count of 5,457 in 2010 and donated an average of 33 pro bono hours per attorney.”

• 7.18.11 – a National Law Journal article, “Cutting to the Bone,” covers the threatened 26% cut to the Legal Services Corporation’s federal appropriation.  The article notes that this large proposed cut would take place at a time when other legal services funding streams have tapered to a trickle; highlights the plight of cash-strapped legal services providers in California, Florida, and New Jersey; and looks at what’s driving the LSC debate here in steamy Washington.  On a related note, we blogged yesterday on the importance of adequately funding the legal services community, and the role that pro bono plays in supplementing, but not substituting for, the work of legal services organizations.

• 7.16.11 – the Express-Times reports on the toll that large state budget cuts will take on Legal Services of Northwest Jersey: ” [T]he nonprofit program took its biggest hit in recent years this month from a severe budget cut.  Democrats asked for an additional $5 million in next year’s Legal Services budget. Instead, Gov. Chris Christie cut $5 million…. By the time the Christie cuts hit, [Legal Services of Northwest Jersey] — which serves Hunterdon, Morris, Somerset, Sussex and Warren counties — will have lost 31 percent of its budget since 2008. They’ve cut staff, implemented salary freezes, stopped retirement contributions for employees, and curtailed benefits. But its caseload remains substantial.”

• 7.16.11 – amidst all the recent discussion of politicians cutting legal services funding out of fiscal necessity, here’s some nostalgia: politicians cutting legal services funding because the program is “going overboard” in its “aggressive” representation of clients.  We’re not talking about much money here, but in the current economic climate every dollar counts.  And North Carolina-based Pisgah Legal Services is losing all of its funding from Henderson County.  From the Hendersonville Tribune: “The [county] commissioners retained removal of the county’s entire $16,745 that would have gone to Pisgah Legal Services….  This change late in the budgeting process was led by commissioners’ Chairman Mike Edney. Edney, an attorney himself, explained he is among those who have seen indications of or who are concerned with allegations that PLS is overzealous. He cited as an example charging its attorney fees from landlords…. But PLS Executive Director Jim Barrett countered June 15 to the commissioners that there were very few cases of charging attorney fees, typically from a landlord defeated in court for an illegal practice. He said the average case costs $523 in PLS legal fees.”

• 7.15.11 – California has recently suffered two “-mageddons.”  One, Carmageddon, seemed a bit silly to your author, an East Coast city dweller who has difficulty grasping how the weekend closure of a freeway would cause such havoc.  The second, up in the Bay Area, is anything but silly.  This one is “Courtmageddon.”  Earlier this week we blogged about the looming closure of 25 out of 63 courtroom in San Francisco Superior Court.  As reported by the Bay Citizen: “[T]he cuts are the result of a state budget that eliminated $350 million from courts throughout California, leaving the San Francisco Superior Court with a $13.75 million deficit.  ‘This is the worst crisis in legal services that I can think of in my professional career in more than 20 years,’ said Bill Hebert, a San Francisco lawyer who is president of the State Bar of California.” 

• 7.15.11 – the Herald-Palladium reports on how the proposed LSC funding cut would affect Western Michiganders.  If the $100+ million cut goes through in Washington DC, LAWM would stand to lose about $500,000.  According to the program’s deputy director, Mary Drolet, “It would probably mean closing one office [among its seven].”  The trouble, of course, is that there is no shortage of clients.  “Drolet said 30 percent of people living in the 17 counties are eligible for services because they meet the income standard, which is less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level. ‘With those kinds of numbers the need is greater than it’s ever been,’ she said.”

• 7.15.11 – in the Pelican State, WAFB reports that Southeast Louisiana Legal Services is opening a Baton Rouge office:  “SLLS was recently selected by the federal Legal Services Corporation (LSC) to receive federal funding for civil legal aid in Baton Rouge and other parishes previously served by the Capital Area Legal Services. The LSC grant began in July. But, the entire LSC grant for the Baton Rouge area will not be available to SLLS until January.”

By: Steve Grumm

New Pro Bono Data Are Interesting, But…

Recently the American Lawyer released its annual pro bono report, which showed that BigLaw pro bono hours dipped markedly in 2010.  From AmLaw’s overview:

“Average pro bono hours for lawyers at Am Law 200 firms plummeted 8 percent in 2010 to their lowest level in three years, reversing a decade of steady growth. The overall average percentage of lawyers who did more than 20 hours of pro bono work dipped 5.2 percent.”

The Pro Bono Institute’s Esther Lardent, writing last week in the National Law Journal, took issue with the “melodramatic headlines” used in reporting those numbers.

“The ‘doom and gloom’ headlines overlook some important facts and figures….  Although it is true that major firms contributed significantly fewer hours of pro bono service in 2010 than in the previous two years, it must be noted that 2010’s law firm pro bono hours were still the third highest in history. That — after the worst recession in living memory and profound, destabilizing and continuing changes in virtually every aspect of the finances and operations of major law firms — is, in context, an accomplishment.”

…The Real Story Is…

Lardent is right.  The pro bono number changes are largely a function of fluctuations in 1) staffing and 2) fee-paying business at law firms.  (Law firms had downsized their ranks of attorneys by 2010, so the pool of potential pro bono volunteers was smaller.  And then, fee-paying business started to pick up, making BigLaw attorneys busier and leaving less time to volunteer.)  Does this explain all of the drop-off?  Maybe not.  But it explains a good bit of it.  And Lardent’s point above should not be lost: 2010’s hours were the third highest historical total.  Not too shabby. 

Another thing that should not be lost is pro bono’s end goal.  Most pro bono advocates devote their time to helping poor people achieve meaningful access to the justice system.  These advocates rely on the support of legal services providers and pro bono clearinghouses to best serve clients.  And right now, the real threats to access-to-justice are 1) the underfunding of Legal Services Corporation grantee organizations and 2) the continued slumping of non-LSC sources (chiefly, IOLTA revenues and state appropriations) which affects LSC grantees, non-LSC providers, and pro bono clearinghouses alike.

A National Law Journal piece published earlier this week highlights the financial troubles plaguing the legal services community, particularly in light of a threatened drastic slashing of LSC’s appropriation:

Pressure on the budgets of legal services programs has been building for three years, since the recession began to eat away at their various sources of funding. It began with the drop in interest rates, cutting into the money from lawyer trust accounts known as IOLTA funds, and it continued with state reductions.

The latest federal proposal by U.S. House Republicans is a 26% cut in congressional funding for the Legal Services Corp. (LSC), which with $404 million in funding makes grants to 136 groups across the country. The proposal follows a 4% midyear cut approved by Congress in April.

Directors of legal services said they’re facing painful choices, as they’re forced to make plans for scaling back their organizations to levels that existed in the 1990s

As LSC had noted in a July 6 press release, the proposed 26% slash in its funding being considered by the House could have a drastic impact on providers and their client communities:

Funding for the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) would be cut by 26 percent in Fiscal Year 2012 under a proposal announced by the House Appropriations Committee [on July 6th]. The Committee bill proposes a $300 million budget for LSC—rolling back LSC funding to a level not seen since 1999.

LSC’s preliminary estimates show that about 235,000 low-income Americans eligible for civil legal assistance at LSC-funded programs would be turned away if the Committee proposal were enacted.

…

LSC-funded programs by the end of 2011 project net staff reductions of 445 employees, including more than 200 attorneys, because of layoffs and attrition, according to survey responses provided by 121 of the 136 LSC-funded programs.  In the responses, 57 percent of the programs project budget deficits for 2011 totaling more than $19 million. Forty-two percent of the respondents said they had imposed a salary freeze, and 31 percent anticipate reducing employee benefits this year.

Some would argue that any cuts in legal services funding can be offset by the contributions of pro bono advocates.  They cannot.  Pro bono attorneys rely on legal services providers and clearinghouses to identify client communities, conduct intake, diagnose clients’ legal problems, and in some circumstances to begin handling cases before the pro bono attorneys take the reins.  Even after that point, many pro bono volunteers look to the legal services community for continued support, technical assistance, and training.  I experienced this firsthand while working as an attorney in a pro bono clearinghouse, and I hear it over and over again from pro bono counsel at law firms.

A large-scale slashing of legal services funding can not simply be offset if volunteer attorneys bump up their hours.  That is a short-sighted “solution” that demonstrates ignorance about the legal services infrastructure, and which will do little to help poor people achieve justice. LSC President Jim Sandman put it succinctly in a recent interview:  “The biggest challenge facing legal services today is lack of funding.”  Pro bono, Sandman went on to note, is a “critical supplement” to the work that legal aid lawyers do.  And he’s right.  But pro bono is not a substitute for adequately funding legal services providers.

…And Here’s What’s Next for the Access-to-Justice Funding Debate…

The LSC funding rollback to $300 million made it through the full House Appropriations Committee’s markup, and it very well could be passed by the full House in the next several days.  Undoubtedly legal services proponents in the Senate and the Obama Administration will push for a more robust appropriation.  And the National Legal Aid & Defender Association, among others, is on the case.

Nonetheless, it is very troubling that at a time when client need is so high and resources are already strained, legal services funding is on the chopping block.  Now is the worst possible time to slash the vital funding that will allow legal services providers to maximize not only their own resources, but also to leverage the pro bono resources that play a signficant role in ensuring that “equal access to justice” is an achievable end, not an empty slogan.

By Lauren Forbes

Princeton University is seeking a University Counsel.  Serving as the primary counsel for The Office of the Dean for Research and the offices that report to the Dean for Research, including Technology Licensing and Research and Project Administration, the University Counsel will meaningfully participate in supporting Princeton’s mission to be a leading research university in the world. The University Counsel will have primary responsibility, as well, for the OGC’s support of the U.S. Department of Energy’s PPPL.

Working in close collaboration with the Vice Provost for International Initiatives, and supporting academic departments and faculty initiatives, the University Counsel will be the primary “international” lawyer in the OGC, facilitating, and often personally providing, appropriate in-house and external (domestic and foreign) advice and assistance to the Vice Provost and others across campus.

The OGC prides itself on being a collaborative group of 21st century counselors, often serving as thought partners for our colleagues throughout the University. As such, the expectations of the office generally, and of its lawyers, are dynamic not static.

Specific responsibilities will include:

• Advising the Dean for Research, the Vice Provost for International Initiatives, and faculty on research collaborations with other institutions, including foreign institutions.
• Advising the Dean for Research and the Office of Research and Project Administration (ORPA) regarding contracts, export control issues, relations with government agencies, and compliance matters.
• Providing counsel and guidance on federal regulations that govern laboratory practices involving laboratory animals and controlled substances.
• Attending monthly meetings of the University Research Board and serving as an active member of the Institutional Review Board for Human Subjects.
• Providing advice and counsel to the Office of Technology Licensing (OTL) on issues including technology transfer, license agreements, material transfer agreements, start-up technology companies, conflicts of interest, and patent assignments and transfers. (While a background in patent law is not required, the University Counsel should have a working knowledge and informed perspective regarding patent law as it pertains to issues affecting University research and technology licensing.)
• Overseeing outside counsel that may be engaged to litigate intellectual property disputes.
• Advising PPPL leadership, interacting with US Department of Energy counsel and counsel for other national laboratories, and providing varied legal support to the PPPL.
• Working closely with the Vice Provost for International Initiatives, and the General Counsel, to develop and enhance the OGC’s support of the University

To view full listing, visit PSLawNet (login required).

By Lauren Forbes

The social media storm has not passed over legal aid advocates.  The growth of social media offers new ways for advocates to connect with and learn from one another. Which resources are advocates using? A recent survey conducted by the editorial team of Clearinghouse Review: Journal of Poverty Law and Policy attempted to learn more about poverty lawyers’ current use of online resources.

By a wide margin, the most popular online resource used for legal research or professional development is listservs, which are used by 81% of respondents. Only 29.1% of respondents indicated that they use RSS newsfeeds to stay on top of relevant news and information. In addition, although more respondents reported using social media than in earlier surveys, professional use of social media is still quite limited.

A more detailed summary of the survey results is available at Techno.la, a technology blog for legal aid and public interest advocates. The editors of Clearinghouse Review are grateful to the survey respondents for their input. The information collected in this and other surveys will be extraordinarily helpful as we plan future content for Clearinghouse Review.

By Jamie Bence

The National Law Journal reports today on the House of Representatives’ proposed 26% cut to Legal Services Corporation funding, following a 4% reduction in April. As we had previously reported, LSC definitely seems to be on the discretionary-spending chopping block in the House:

Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), the chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction over the LSC, describes himself as a supporter of its work. At a July 13 hearing, Wolf didn’t directly address the LSC, instead speaking generally about the need to reduce the federal budget deficit. “In this austere budget climate, we have had to make some tough choices in order to preserve at a freeze level the funding for core federal law enforcement functions,” Wolf said.

Still, the proposed 26% cut to LSC is much deeper than the 6% cut to all programs that fall within Wolf’s subcommittee. Those programs include such popular initiatives as the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Commerce Department trade promotion.

The impact of such cuts on the ground will likely be drastic. Providers have already seen cutbacks in staffing, resources and the types of services they are able to provide:

“How do you choose between, for example, somebody who’s being evicted and someone who’s the victim of domestic violence? And yet those are the kinds of choices we have,” said Melville “De” Miller Jr., president of Legal Services of New Jersey. “None of them are satisfactory. They all deny equal access to justice.”

Miller said his state had 720 legal services workers at the beginning of 2008, but the number has since dropped to 490 and will likely continue to fall. An array of other cuts are under consideration, he said: closing offices, restricting the types of cases handled and lowering the income ceiling to be eligible for services.

While this proposal would likely pass in the House, there are several other players yet to weigh in. While LSC requested $516.5 million, the Obama administration has requested the same appropriations made in 2010. The Senate appropriations will likely be higher than the House numbers, but in these early stages, it remains unclear how deep the cuts will run.  One certainty is that access-to-justice advocates are going to be gearing up for a fight to ensure that LSC doesn’t suffer too large a cut.

By: Steve Grumm

Happy Friday, dear readers!  This week’s edition is fairly short, but includes a great deal of content related to legal services funding (or, rather, lack of).  Featured: the LSC’er-in-chief on the legal services resources crunch and the value of pro bono; the Pro Bono Institute’s Esther Lardent puts recently reported pro bono figures in context; MoJo looks at the House proposal to slash LSC funding; better job protections for law school clinicians?; the controversy surrounding cuts in state funding to New Jersey legal services programs; two Massachusetts legal services programs tie the knot.

• 7.14.11 – Legal Services Corporation president Jim Sandman did an interview with the Pro Bono Institute about the widening justice gap that results from more and more poor people seeking help from LSC grantees at a time when funding is so strained, and the “essential” part that pro bono plays in stopping the justice gap from further widening.  Quotable Sandman: “The biggest challenge facing legal services today is lack of funding.”  Pro bono, Sandman went on to note, is a “critical supplement” to the work that legal aid lawyers do, even if it cannot be a substitute for it.

• 7.12.11 – the Pro Bono Institute’s Esther Lardent reacts to AmLaw numbers showing a marked drop in Biglaw pro bono hours in 2010, taking issue with the “melodramatic headlines” used in reporting those numbers.  From her Nat’l. Law Journal piece: “The “doom and gloom” headlines overlook some important facts and figures….  Although it is true that major firms contributed significantly fewer hours of pro bono service in 2010 than in the previous two years, it must be noted that 2010’s law firm pro bono hours were still the third highest in history. That — after the worst recession in living memory and profound, destabilizing and continuing changes in virtually every aspect of the finances and operations of major law firms — is, in context, an accomplishment.”  Esther is right.  The pro bono number changes are largely a function of fluctuations in staffing and fee-paying business at law firms.  The real story about delivering legal services to poor people has to do w/ the threatened underfunding of Legal Services Corporation grantee organizations – which, importantly, need funding to help pro bono volunteers efficiently handle cases – as well as the continued slumping of non-LSC sources (chiefly IOLTA). 

• 7.12.11 – commy-pinko-tree-hugging-liberal outlet Mother Jones breaks down the House Appropriations Committee’s proposed 26% cut to LSC’s budget, noting that a cut couldn’t come at a worse time for legal services providers and their low-income clients.  The article highlights the fact that non-federal funding streams, including IOLTA and state appropriations, have already tapered off.  (To MoJo’s mention of Florida as a state that’s cut funding, we’d add NH, NJ, PA, and WI, among others.)  The article also hits on an important point that was tucked into the end of an LSC press release about the proposed cuts: while a record 63 million people qualified for legal services last year, LSC grantees have been forced to shed staff; 200 more lawyers could vanish from LSC programs by the end of 2011.
• And while we’re over on the left side of the political spectrum, the Daily Kos issues a rallying cry to preserve LSC funding.

• 7.11.11 – Better job protections for law school clinicians?  The ABA is pondering a step towards solidifying the employment relationships between nontraditional faculty and their schools, stopping just short of tenure.  From the National Law Journal: “The Standards Review Committee on July 10 voiced initial support for a proposal to require that schools at least provide full-time faculty members with a ‘program of presumptively renewable long-term contracts that are at least five years in duration after a probationary period reasonably similar to that for tenure-track faculty members’.”  Huzzah!  Clinicians have long felt like second-class citizens in the Ivory Tower.  And their role will arguably – hopefully, in my view – become more important as schools incorporate more experience-based learning programs into their curricula.

• 7.8.11 – in the Garden State, the Star-Ledger’s editorial board sounds a truculent note in opposing Gov. Chris Christie’s surprise $5 million legal services budget cut:  “[T]hanks to Gov. Chris Christie’s recent budget slashes on services for the poor, no matter how compelling your case is, you may be forced to argue it alone.  If you’re being beaten by your spouse, it may be much more difficult to get a divorce or restraining order. If you’re seeking custody of your kids or visitation rights, your case might be too time-consuming for a pro bono lawyer to take on. You may have no way to force a delinquent boyfriend to pay child support, or fight your unjustified eviction…. A loss of $5 million means Legal Services must cut at least 50 staffers and serve at least 5,500 fewer clients. This, at a time when so many more people have lost their jobs and fallen into poverty. Our democracy promises access to equal justice. But without the funding to back that up, it’s justice based on your bank account.”  UPDATE: the cuts are final, as the Senate failed to muster enough votes to legislatively override the budget plan (according to a 7.13.11 piece in Bloomberg Businessweek).

• 7.8.11 – Two Massachusetts legal services programs have merged.  A short blurb in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette reports:  Legal Assistance Corp. of Central Massachusetts and Western Massachusetts Legal Services have combined to become Community Legal Aid, providing free legal help to low-income and elderly people in Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire, Franklin and Berkshire Counties.  Legal Assistance Corp. of Central Massachusetts has traditionally operated in the central part of the state, with Western Massachusetts Legal Services operating in the state’s four western counties, the organizations reported in a news release. Together they will have more than 50 staff members and multiple locations.”   And here’s a similar blurb in the Worcester Business Journal.  (Community Legal Aid is not an LSC grantee, as neither of its two parent programs were.)