As CBS News reported last week, Sen. Scott Brown (D-Mass.), Education Secretary Arne Duncan and the White House’s Reggie Love led “Hill’s Angels,” a team of a dozen lawmakers and others, in a charity basketball game against Georgetown University law school professors on Wednesday. The 24th annual Home Court Game benefitted the Washington Legal Clinic for the homeless. The clinic provides free legal services to the D.C. homeless on issues ranging from unfair evictions to acquiring food stamps.“Obviously, legal services for people who need it, especially in these tough economic times it’s serious,” Brown told CBS News. “You know you have to commend the school for doing this for what 25 years now, that’s great.”

The “Home Court Game” has raised over $4 million in the past 24 years and this year’s event netted a record $414,000.

“Obviously, legal services for people who need it, especially in these tough economic times it’s serious,” Brown told CBS News. “You know you have to commend the school for doing this for what 25 years now, that’s great.”

The “Home Court Game” has raised over $4 million in the past 24 years and this year’s event netted a record $414,000.

Georgetown University’s newspaper, The Hoya, also covered the exhibition game, pointing out that it is an event primarily orchestrated by students.

About 350 people filled the bleachers at the Trinity-Washington University basketball center, many of them students who came to cheer on the Law Center team. A new addition to the Hoya Lawyas was William Treanor, the Law Center’s dean.

“We won last year, and I have to say this year they’ve gone all-out,” Treanor said at halftime. “They’ve got one former pro player and at least three former college players, but we’re pretty pleased with what we’re doing. We have the most heart.”

Sen. Brown, known in his playing days as “Downtown Scotty Brown” at Tufts University, led the Hill’s Angels in scoring with 15 points. Thune, who also played in college and whom Brown calls “the fastest man in Congress,” added nine points and eight rebounds.

Duncan, a co-captain in his days with the Harvard Crimson, also had a brief professional stint in Australia. The secretary of education also played in this year’s NBA All-Star Weekend celebrity basketball game in Los Angeles. He scored nine points Wednesday and led his team in assists.

“This is the least I could do to come out and support this extraordinary cause,” Duncan said after the game. “The students are doing such great work and making a huge difference in the community, so I was happy to be a small, small part of this.”

Rooting for both squads were cheerleaders from Georgetown and Thurgood Marshall Academy Public Charter High School in Southeast D.C. Jack the Bulldog also made an appearance to devour a box topped by a miniature Capitol dome replica.

The competitive contest was filled with memorable moments. In the first half, Brown blocked the shot of Associate Professor Laura Donohue, drawing a chorus of boos from the crowd. On the first possession of the second half, Reggie Love, a former national champion with Duke University’s Blue Devils, threw down a powerful two-handed dunk.

…

The congressional team was led by Thune and Sen. Robert Casey, Jr. (D-Pa.) and coached by Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.). The team featured three senators, two Senate aides and five members of the House of Representatives along with Duncan and Love. In 24 years, Home Court has raised nearly $4 million for the legal clinic, mostly through donations from attendees. The annual game provides over one-third of the charity’s budget.

“I was stunned at over $400,000 — it’s amazing,” Duncan said. “To see all the time and effort that the students put in, this what it’s all about. These are the future leaders. They are making a huge impact in the community. I’m just so proud of what they’re doing.”

Late last week the Blog of the Legal Times noted that, amid all the political fuss related to the federal budget/shutdown debate, LSC is silently twisting in the wind and could wind up facing millions in cuts:

The next week will likely determine whether the Legal Services Corp. is forced to make sharp midyear cuts in its budget, as lawmakers and Obama administration officials attempt to finish negotiations for federal spending through Sept. 30.

…

As part of a broad Republican plan to trim federal spending, the House in February approved a $70 million midyear cut to the Legal Services Corp., the nation’s largest funding source for civil legal aid to the poor. The proposal failed in the Senate, but a cut could still be part of any compromise. The agency’s leadership says the cuts would devastate local grantees nationwide, even as those programs see increases in demand related to foreclosures and the stagnant economy. The agency’s budget is $420 million.

…

Neither Reid nor other Senate Democratic leaders mentioned the agency as among their top priorities…

Substantial cuts in discretionary spending are a certainty in the current negotiations.  Democrats in particular are going to have to pick and choose which programs they defend from cuts.  And while folks are going to bat for popular programs like NPR, we’ve not recently heard elected officials issuing any staunch, public defenses of legal services funding.  A memo last week from Don Saunders, Vice President for Civil Legal Services at the National Legal Aid & Defender Association, to legal services executive directors highlights the uncertainty about which federal programs are likely to see cuts:

At this point, there is no public information available on what cuts the Democratic leadership is considering offering to reach a level of $33 billion or what the priorities for cuts are within the Republican House leadership.  We, and our allies, remain very active on the Hill and continue to hear strong statements of support from a variety of Senators and House members for LSC funding.  Unfortunately…we will have to continue to wait for specific information as this how this process will finally be resolved.

As an interesting aside, Senators Brown of Massachusetts and Thune of South Dakota, both Republicans, recently joined executive branch officials and others in helping to raise over $400K for the DC-based Legal Clinic for the Homeless at a charity basketball event.  But the Legal Clinic is not an LSC grantee, and we doubt that either of these senators will stand up to preserve LSC funding at current levels (although Sen. Brown has voiced concern about broad-based cuts to social safety net programs).

The 2011 Major League Baseball season began yesterday, and the Glorious Philadelphia Phillies Baseball Franchise opens its season today.  Alas, the PSLawNet Blog’s dream of securing the world’s easiest job – the fifth man in the Phillies rotation – has not come to pass.  So here we sit at the NALP office, plugging away at the Public Interest Law News Bulletin – until a very, very long lunch break at about, oh, 1:05pm EDT.

Speaking of the Bulletin, here’s what we’ve got: prospects bleak for legal services funding from the New York legislature; news about state/local government revenues across the nation is mixed, at best; news about indigent defense reform in New York is not mixed, it’s bad; meet the federal official who’s responsible to recruit and retain the next generation of civil servants; workplace discrimination hits low-income women hardest, according to a new report; cash bonuses for convictions in a Colorado prosecutor’s office?; just say no to boosting attorney registration fees to support legal aid; legal services funding shortages may kill a popular Florida disability advocacy project; some great public interest funding news at UVA Law; a constitutional showdown in Washington State pits legal services advocates against budget-cutting state officials.

• 3.31.11 – well, we should have known it would be a tough row to hoe.  New York Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman has been a vocal, and active, advocate for bolstering civil legal services during a time of tremendous client need.  In addition to creating an Attorney Emeritus Program to make it easy for retired lawyers to do pro bono, he has been pushing hard for state funding to beef up the legal services infrastructure.  Well, New York state legislators are working away at a final budget proposal, and things are looking bleak for funding.  From the New York Law Journal:  “Lippman has aggressively sought an additional $25 million for civil legal services in the fiscal year beginning tomorrow, the first installment in a four-year $100 million increase. But that was thrown into doubt by a budget agreement Sunday that slashed another $70 million on top of an earlier $100 million Judge Lippman had offered in the Judiciary’s proposed budget….  Judge Lippman, who had said Monday that the budget cuts could mean “hundreds” of nonjudicial layoffs, declined to discuss specific cost-saving measures under consideration by court administrators. However, it is unlikely that the full $25 million would be available for civil legal services.”

• 3.29.11 – the PSLawNet Blog has frequently covered job cuts affecting state and local government lawyers in the recession’s wake.  Some new census data show how state and local governments are faring in terms of fiscal health.  Short version: some immediate good news, but a lot of uncertainty in the longer term.  From the Washington Post: “State and local tax revenues grew during the last three months of 2010, continuing a recovery from the steep drops that followed the recession, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday.  Despite the modest revenue growth, state and local governments are contending with huge budget gaps that have led to service cuts and reductions in pay and rights for public employees…. Though the recovery in state revenues is good news for state and local governments, it has not been sufficient to compensate for the huge revenue losses caused by the recession. States also are coping with fast-increasing costs for Medicaid and higher education, while they are bracing for the loss of about $50 billion in federal stimulus money in the coming budget year.”

• 3.29.11 – the North Country Gazette reports on some bad news for indigent defense funding in the Empire State:  “The just-announced State budget deal cuts funding for the Office of Indigent Legal Services in half according to the Justice Fund.  ‘This ill advised compromise cut threatens to gut reform before it begins,’ lamented Edward Nowak, chair of the Justice Fund board. ‘The injustices resulting from New York State’s failure to fulfill its duty to provide adequate representation to people charged with crime or threatened with loss of their children have gone on too long,’ he added.”  According to the story, New York State has historically farmed out indigent defense responsibilities to its counties, leaving a patchwork system filled with qualitative inconsistencies.  The Office of Indigent Legal Services is part of a recent effort to put the state’s weight behind indigent defense reform.  But due to the funding cut, it’s now a smaller part.

• 3.29.11 – the Washington Post’s “Federal Player of the Week” is a woman whose work will affect hundreds and hundreds of law students who aspire to federal government careers: “Juanita Wheeler has a big job ahead of her.  In December, President Obama issued an executive order that called for reforming the way our government recruits and hires student interns and recent graduates. Wheeler’s task now is to set up the new processes that federal agencies will use to bring young talent into the federal fold….  As head of federal student programs at the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM), Wheeler oversees the intern and student hiring and recruiting under the newly created ‘Pathways Program’ She also helps manage the Presidential Management Fellows Program, a two-year leadership development initiative for entry level individuals with advanced degrees, now operating in approximately 80 agencies.”

• 3.29.11 – a National Law Journal article looks at a new report on the issue of low-income women suffering from workplace discrimination: “Discrimination lawsuits brought by working professionals tend to draw public attention, but it’s low-wage workers who suffer the harshest consequences in those circumstances, according to a report by the Center for WorkLife Law at University of California Hastings College of the Law.  The report, titled ‘Poor, Pregnant, and Fired: Caregiver Discrimination Against Low-Wage Workers,’ analyses [sic] 50 workplace discrimination lawsuits — most resolved during the past five years — brought by low-wage workers. It highlights ways in which employers violate workers’ rights.”

• 3.29.11 – we blogged earlier this week about an interesting story coming out of the Denver suburbs: a controversy is brewing about a county prosecutor’s past policy of awarding financial bonuses which were tied in part to her prosecutors’ successes in getting convictions at trial.  The concern is that pinning a financial award to winning in court may motivate a prosecuting attorney to forgo plea deals in order to secure more convictions.  It could essentially give a prosecuting attorney a financial interest in the cases they handle.  Most recently, a public defender moved to have a prosecutor working for District Attorney Carol Chambers removed from a case on account of concerns about a financial conflict.  Here’s some coverage:
  • a 3.29.11 Denver Post article covers the motion: “A motion questioning an Arapahoe County prosecutor’s ability to try a felony kidnapping case in light of District Attorney Carol Chambers’ controversial bonus criteria survived its first hearing Monday.  Eighteenth Judicial District Court Judge Carlos Samour Jr. gave the defense more time to subpoena documents from Chambers’ office detailing the bonuses paid last year that rewarded felony prosecutors who tried at least five cases and won conviction in 70 percent of them.”  Chambers disputes the notion that her prosecutors have financial stakes in cases and noted that budget constraints will prevent any future bonus awards anyway.  (The bonuses totaled over $164,000 in 2010 and averaged $1100 for felony prosecutors.)
  • 3.25.11 – here’s some earlier coverage, including  a video story, from Denver-based TV station KUSA.  In it, Chambers is adamant in defending of the bonuses, noting that they were offered not just to trial lawyers but also to support staff.  She also argues that courtroom success was but one criterion in the bonus calculations, and that attorneys did not know it was a criterion at all.

• 3.28.11 – on the Minnesota Lawyer’s “J.D. Rising” blog, a former legal services attorney opposes the state high court’s order for a $100 increase in attorney registration fees that will channel funds to the Board of Public Defense and the Legal Services Planning Committee.  While the need for additional funding in both the criminal and civil legal aid communities is obvious, writes Leah Weaver, she believes that cobbling together funding via the fee increase takes some of the burden off of the parties who should carry it.  “I am opposed to the fee increase because I believe it gives the Governor and the Legislature a pass on dealing with the real crisis facing our courts. As Justice Stras wrote in his [concurring opinion re the court’s fee increase order], ‘it is not the responsibility of lawyers alone to disproportionately fund a core, constitutionally-mandated service of government through a fee that was designed solely to regulate our profession.’ But by extending the fee increase, the Court allows Governor Dayton and the Legislature to continue not to make court funding a priority.”

• 3.28.11 – the Florida Times-Union reports that funding shortfalls at Jacksonville Area Legal Aid threaten a path-breaking project that provides advocacy for the hearing impaired.  Sharon Caserta, a Class-of-2005 Equal Justice Works Fellow now working as a staff attorney at JALA, “has become recognized as a trailblazer statewide for protecting the rights of the deaf and hard of hearing.  Trouble is brewing, though. The career Caserta sprouted five years ago…could be fading away as funding becomes scarce. The prospect has…Legal Aid Executive Director Michael Figgins and Florida Association of the Deaf President June McMahon bracing themselves.  Figgins said the program costs $150,000 annually, but this year Legal Aid has come up $75,000 short. The biggest part of the problem, he said, is the Florida Bar Foundation’s trust accounts are still struggling from the recession.”

• 3.28.11 – the Daily Progress reports on UVA Law’s use of some legal services grant funding: “The University of Virginia School of Law will use a $150,000 grant to help provide legal services to the region’s poor.  The grant from the Jessie Ball DuPont Fund will be used to develop the Access to Justice Partnership, which officials hope will ultimately draw on pro bono services from roughly 75 private attorneys and about as many law students annually.  Law school officials will collaborate with the local bar, the Legal Aid Justice Center and the Central Virginia Legal Aid Society.”  This isn’t the only public interest funding news from UVA Law.  Earlier this week we blogged that the school’s Public Interest Law Association raised over $375,000 to fund summer public interest work for rising 2 and 3Ls.

• 3.27.11 – a constitutional showdown about the fate of a state-funded food stamp program could portend many battles between public interest lawyers and state governments as the latter push to shrink budget deficits by cutting social services.  The Seattle Post Intelligencer reports that Columbia Legal Services is leading the charge to stop Washington State from discontinuing the Food Assistance for Legal Immigrants (FAP) program.  Here’s the posture of the federal class-action litigation: “[A federal judge] on Tuesday denied the state’s request that she reconsider her preliminary injunction last month forcing the state Department of Social and Health Services to fully restore…FAP. The program, which had been cut on Jan. 31, serves more than 10,300 households and provides benefits to immigrants who are ineligible for federal food stamps.  The state had hoped to save an estimated $7.2 million for the remainder of the current biennium and about $60.5 million for the next one by terminating the FAP.  But [the court] found that by cutting off food assistance to a certain class of legal immigrants while continuing to operate and partially fund the federal food assistance program – which serves some immigrants – the state may be in violation of the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.”  The facts driving this case are a bit nuanced, but as noted in the article a similar federal case originated in Hawaii last year.  And it’s our bet that, as state governments leave no stones unturned in looking to cut expenses, we’ll see more such actions filed by legal services providers elsewhere in the U.S.

Nice skyline, Chicago. Cubs still stink.

The PSLawNet Blog intended to cover this announcement out of the Windy City several days ago, but we succumbed to the flu last week.  So, better late than never…

From a March 11 announcement:

The University of Chicago Law School today announced a complete redesign of its Loan Repayment Assistance Program (LRAP), making it the most generous program of its kind. The three most important changes to the program are that it now offers the opportunity for any graduate staying in public interest for ten years to go to law school for free, that all graduates who serve as judicial clerks will be eligible for the program, and that a generous $80,000 salary cap will make the program more inclusive than ever.

Hah – the law school’s communications department chose to refer to the new LRAP program as “dramatic.”  We’ve never thought of LRAPs as involving much drama.  That said, we describe the program as “kickarse,” so perhaps we shouldn’t appoint ourselves the modifier police.

We digress.  Here’s a voice of approval of Chicago Law’s new LRAP, emanating from North-side rival Northwestern Law.  Northwestern adjunct professor Steven Harper, an observer of legal industry goings-on, writes in The American Lawyer:

When law schools get it wrong, they deserve the scorn that comes with a public spotlight. When they get it right, they should bask in its warm glow. The University of Chicago Law School recently got it right. Really right.

…

A single line from the school’s website description says it all: “This means that a graduate who engages in qualifying work for ten years, earns less than the salary cap, and maintains enrollment in the federal Income-Based Repayment Program, will receive a FREE University of Chicago Law School education!

“Qualifying work” is public interest broadly defined as “the full-time practice of law, or in a position normally requiring a law degree, in a nonprofit organization or government office, other than legal academia.” It includes judicial clerkships.

The “salary cap” is $80,000 and doesn’t include spousal income. That combination seems to beat Harvard, Yale and Stanford. (Caveat: The differences across school programs can be significant and prospective students should consider their own circumstances, run the numbers, and determine which one produces the best individual result.)

Huzzah, U. of Chicago!

Here’s an interesting story out of Aurora, Colorado from Denver-based boobtube station KUSA.  A public defender has filed a motion to have a special prosecutor assigned in a case because the local district attorney may have a policy of giving financial bonuses to attorneys with high conviction rates.

The potential problem here is laid out by a local attorney (not the public defender who filed the motion):   

Aurora attorney Derek Cole says giving money to prosecutors who had high conviction rates at trial could encourage them to take cases to trial and not offer plea bargains.

“If I am representing somebody in a trial and there is an extraneous factor that I don’t know, we may get some resistance from the district attorney and it may be because they want a bonus and it’s just not acceptable,” Cole said. “It upsets the balance.”

But, the District Attorney, Carol Chambers, says that’s not what’s going on:

“We have not done anything unethical. We do not give people money for convicting people. That is distorted and it is untrue.”

Chambers went on to note that trial victories was only one factor in determining bonuses.  The office gave out almost $165K in bonuses in 2010, but it’s discontinued the practice as a result of budget cuts.

It seems to us that if bonuses were given based upon a number of factors, one of which was success at trial, that’s cool.  But if bonuses were tied solely or primarily to conviction rates, that could be a problem.  The story doesn’t say what bonus amounts were awarded to attorneys, so it’s hard to know how much incentive a bonus might be for a prosecutor.

PSLawNet Blog Verdict: we need more facts.  But we figured we’d post because it raises an interesting ethics question.

This week: the NYT profiles an EJW Fellow doing holistic defense work; Project Salute is serving Michigan veterans; a legislative proposal to fund legal services for foster children in Nevada; how badly will the Granite State cut funding to New Hampshire Legal Assistance?; a slight bump in charitable giving in the 2010, according to the Nonprofit Research Collaborative; an LSC $ cut could badly gum up the works in Connecticut’s legal services system; the incoming ABA president comes out swinging for legal services funding.

• 3.24.11 – the New York Times runs a nice profile of Equal Justice Works Fellow Michelle Parris, who graduated from law school in 2010 and is completing her fellowship with the Bronx Defenders.  Parris’s project focuses on providing holistic services to Bronx Defenders clients, helping them to avoid homelessness, to access health care, and to steer clear of the criminal justice system in the future.  (For those wondering why an Equal Justice Works fellow is working with a defender when fellows traditionally focus on civil justice matters – some advocates now see the provision of ancillary, civil legal services as being intertwined with, and maybe even essential to, providing successful indigent defense services.  We recently blogged about a Crime Report story on the traction that holistic indigent defense programs are gaining.)  On an unrelated, and lighter, note, we’ve also blogged from time to time about the fact that many lawyers feel comfortable working in either prosecution or indigent defense.  No so Ms. Parris!  When asked about working as a prosecutor: “No, never! I can’t imagine being in the position of prosecuting someone. Our job is to essentially look at the best in a person. Just because a person made mistakes doesn’t mean they’re not redeemable.”

• 3.24.11 – the Detroit Free Press offers an update on Detroit Mercy’s innovative veterans clinic: “University of Detroit Mercy School of Law’s (UDM Law) Project SALUTE is traveling across the State of Michigan in a mobile law office (a recreational vehicle custom designed, built and generously donated by General Motors Corporation) providing free legal advice to low-income veterans on their federal veterans’ disability and pension benefits claims. Utilizing a grant from the State of Michigan, Project SALUTE will host a veterans’ legal clinic in Detroit on Wednesday, March 30, 2011 … The state grant is also being used to establish a freestanding Veterans Clinic at the school dedicated to specifically addressing veterans’ disability and pension benefits matters.”

• 3.23.11 – as state governments are tightening budgetary belts, we’ve seen a number of efforts made in the legal services community to ensure that the poor and vulnerable don’t suffer too much in the name of fiscal austerity.  The Reno Gazette Journal reports on a proposal to shore up legal services funding for children in Nevada’s foster care system: “Former Nevada Assembly Speaker Barbara Buckley is promoting a bill in the Legislature to increase fees at county recorders’ offices and funnel the money to legal services for abused or neglected children … The bill would raise a surcharge for recording a document, deed, map or survey to $3 from its present $1, and direct the additional money to provide legal services to children in the foster care system … Three nonprofit organizations — Nevada Legal Services, Washoe Legal Services and Buckley’s organization, the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada — would gain from the revenue.”  According to an official at the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, half of the roughly 3000 children in the foster care system do not have representation.

• 3.23.11 – speaking of state funding and legal services, the Nashua Telegraph reports on the potential impact of budget cuts on New Hampshire Legal Assistance as legislators wrangle with the Granite State’s two-year spending bill.  In a Tuesday night mark-up session, some NHLA funding was reinserted into a proposed measure.  But NHLA is still looking at a significant cut: “Among the spending changes approved as add-ons to the plan was $250,000 so that New Hampshire Legal Assistance would not close its only office in the North Country. The spending plan from the House panels reduces grants to the legal aid group by $1.4 million, and advocates have warned this could lead to closing offices in Nashua and Concord.”

• 3.23.11 – The Atlantic picks up on a new report showing a slight, post-recession uptick in charitable giving:  “As the U.S. economy recovers from the recent recession, so is charitable giving. In 2010, 43% of charities reported more contributions than in 2009, according to a survey (.pdf) conducted by the Nonprofit Research Collaborative (“NRC”). Of the charities surveyed, 24% reported approximately the same level of giving, while 33% reported a decline.”

• 3.21.11 – the Connecticut Law Tribune reports that potential LSC funding cuts could wreak havoc in the Constitution State because its main case intake program relies on federal dollars: “A proposed $70 million cut in federal legal aid would devastate a Connecticut clearinghouse that assists 15,000 clients a year and further hobble three other agencies still reeling from a dramatic drop in state-based funds, officials said.  Janice Chiaretto, executive director of Statewide Legal Services, said her agency is receiving about $2.7 million this year in federal Legal Services Corp. funding. The proposed cut would mean a $500,000 reduction, or the equivalent of half a dozen staff positions and thousands of clients assisted. Statewide Legal Services is the only Connecticut agency to receive the federal funds, but others would feel the loss because many of their cases are pre-screened and referred by Statewide.”  Funding for the state’s legal services community has been greatly reduced as a consequence of the recession.  “[O]verall budgets at the Connecticut legal aid agencies are still down 18 percent from 2007 levels.”  Fifty lawyers at Connecticut Legal Services are taking once-a-month furloughs to help make ends meet.

• 3.18.11 – a piece in North Carolina’s Asheville Citizen Times shows that it’s not just the ABA’s current president, but also its president elect, who’s going to bat for legal services funding.  President-elect Bill Robinson, at a recent engagement in Asheville, said, “The proposed cuts to legal services are going to hurt the most vulnerable citizens in our society…What has defined us as a constitutional democracy has been access to justice…If our most vulnerable citizens can’t get access to justice, access to our courts, then justice for all of us is compromised.”

This week: the ABA president on an underfunded justice system; death, taxes and educational debt; the Lone Star State reckons it needs legal services funding; ditto the Tennesseans; ditto ditto the Pennsylvanians; the National Law Journal runs a multi-article feature, putting its finger on the pulse of civil legal services; a San Francisco prosecutor shines during a dark time; and she gets paid, unlike some prosecutors in L.A., the ABA says, “Fund legal services!”; and New Yorks’ prosecutors and defenders get some loan repayment help.

• 3.17.11 – writing in The Hill’s Congress Blog, ABA president Stephen Zack laments that funding shortages hamper access to the justice system.  Courts are underfunded, the legal services community is facing Congressional funding cuts despite overwhelming demand for their services, and it is difficult for law graduates to make a living as “Main Street” lawyers.  (There’s more from the ABA and Zack specifically on legal services funding cuts a few stories down.)

• 3.16.11 – one of the chief concerns among new public interest lawyers is loan repayment.  On the issue of how policymakers and the general public perceive the problem of student debt, a new report dispels the notion that a borrower must be financially comfortable if they are not in default.  From Inside Higher Ed: “Much of the discussion about college student debt revolves around the 15 percent of borrowers who default on their loans…”  And this leaves many with the impression that the other 85% are in decent shape.  “Yet a study released Tuesday by the [Institute for Higher Education Policy] suggests otherwise, showing that a majority of borrowers at least delay some loan payments, and a full quarter (26 percent) actually go into delinquency on their debt at some point during their first five years of repayment.”  The study looks at a cohort of grads whose repayment periods began before the federal Income Based Repayment program became available.  Nevertheless, we find the report’s findings compelling.  They highlight the fact that many borrowers who do not actually default still struggle with educational debt.  In a great blog post our friend Heather Jarvis notes the following about graduate students as reported in the study: “Although graduate and professional borrowers were less likely than other borrowers to have been delinquent or defaulted on their student loans, 42% couldn’t manage to make timely payments without either postponing their payments, becoming delinquent, or defaulting on their student loans.”

• 3.15.11 – the Fort Worth Star-Telegram runs an editorial in support of state legislative proposals that would boost legal services funding, mainly via increases in court filing fees.  The editorial notes that the state’s two most significant legal services revenue streams – federal funding and IOLTA revenues – are, respectively, likely to shrink and already shrunken.  Anticipating cuts in Legal Services Corporation (LSC) funding, “Legal Services of Northwest Texas already is planning to eliminate paid law school internships and not fill six attorney vacancies.”  A state appropriation to shore up legal services, which was made last year, is out of the question this year.  So the newest proposed solutions are the best bets: “This session, a bipartisan collection of bills has been filed to generate the revenue IOLTA accounts aren’t. Proposals include increasing District Court civil filing fees by $10 ($6.6 million over the 2012-13 biennium); adding costs for filing county records and for misdemeanor convictions in justice and municipal courts ($58 million to $68.9 million, split between legal aid and indigent criminal defense); and dedicating court-ordered restitution in consumer-protection lawsuits to legal aid in consumer cases (possibly more than $1 million).”

• 3.15.11 – in a Tennessean op-ed, Gary Housepian, executive director of the Legal Aid Society of Middle Tennessee and the Cumberlands, makes the case for LSC funding.  Housepian writes that not only are federal dollars very efficiently used by LSC grantee programs like his, but those dollars also allow grantees to raise private sector funds to boost service capacity.  Housepian acknowledges that government funds are scarcer, but argues that we can not sacrifice equal justice.  An essential component of [equal justice] is the availability of legal aid, especially to those most vulnerable to losing the absolute necessities of life. Providing access to justice to every American is not a luxury; it is an obligation.”

• 3.14.11 – the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that state funding for civil legal services would remain close to current levels under Gov. Tom Corbett’s budget proposal.  “[Corbett] proposes to keep $5.05 million in legal services, funded through a Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) that involves federal funds targeted to urban or rural areas in economic distress, at the same level. He also proposes that funding for the Department of Public Welfare to contract with the Pennsylvania Legal Aid Network (PLAN) to provide low-income people legal assistance be held at $3.01 million, down from $3.04 million in this fiscal year.”  But, because it seems that no good news about legal services funding can exist these days without some offsetting bad news, a filing fee revenue stream that had channeled some money to legal services is set to expire in early 2012.  And of course there is uncertainty about federal funding via LSC.

• 3.14.11 – the National Law Journal runs an extensive, multi-article report on the state of the legal services community, exploring the need for assistance among clients, funding uncertainties, political considerations, etc.  Among others, the NLJ’s “Power of Hope” report includes:
  • A story on work done by Maine’s Pine Tree Legal Assistance to empower a domestic violence victim;
  • A history of the Legal Services Corporation’s funding roller-coaster ride; and
  • An interview with one of LSC’s most vocal critics, Kenneth Boehm of the National Legal and Policy Center. 

• 3.14.11 – The Recorder in California has a nice profile of San Francisco prosecutor Sharon Woo, who had sent warning signals to superiors about strange events at the city’s crime lab.  Those strange events blossomed into a full-on scandal, as a crime lab technician admitted stealing narcotics.  Woo successfully managed the thorny, politically charged fallout, and has emerged as a star in the office.  Woo has been promoted by the new district attorney to the “newly created position of chief assistant for operations.”

• 3.14.11 – speaking of California prosecutors, a Los Angeles Times article begins this way: “Malibu resident Ashley St. Johns-Jacobs, 40, typically rises before 5 a.m. to get to her job at the Los Angeles city attorney’s office by 8 a.m. After a full day prosecuting misdemeanors, she often brings work home.  What she doesn’t bring home is a paycheck. With no position open, she has been working as an unpaid intern for nearly a year in hopes of eventually getting hired when a job opens up.”  The piece goes on to look at the phenomenon of would-be employees taking unpaid positions during an economic recovery that has been stingy about producing new jobs.  “Interns” are exempted from labor wage regulations, but is an “intern” an “intern” if they are essentially doing the work that a professional would do?  As you may guess, it depends on the nature of the “internship.” 

• 3.11.11 – “In written testimony submitted to the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies today, American Bar Association President Stephen N. Zack called on Congress to fund the Legal Services Corporation at $450 million, citing increased need for assistance for the poor and working class during tough economic times.  ‘Appropriations for the Legal Services Corporation is not just about funding another federal agency.  This is about providing legal services for the 57 million Americans at or below the poverty line, including 19 million children, who are eligible for assistance,’ said Zack.”  Here’s an ABA press release, and here’s the text of Zack’s testimony.

• 3.10.11 – prosecutors and public defenders in New York State may now benefit from federal John R. Justice Act loan repayment assistance funds, which are being administered by the state’s Higher Education Services Corporation.  Here’s a press release with more info.  The application deadline is May 1, 2011.

This is what a political football looks like.

We posted earlier this week about the National Law Journal’s multi-story feature on civil legal services.  One of those stories, “For LSC, a 30-year Funding Rollercoaster,” does a nice job of tracing the history of LSC’s congressional funding fluctuations amid shifting political winds.  The PSLawNet Blog is a history dork, but we like to think that this look back at the history of federally funded legal services will be useful for both students and newer attorneys alike.

A synopsis in quotes (emphasis ours):

…The Legal Services Corp. has its roots in the Johnson administration’s “war on poverty.”…

…In 1974, [President Nixon] signed the Legal Services Corporation Act [which established LSC as a stand-alone, quasi-governmental agency]….

…In 1980, Congress allocated a record $300 million to the LSC, which funded 1,450 local offices staffed by roughly 6,000 attorneys.  But when Reagan became president, the LSC became a major battleground between liberals and conservatives….

…[I]n 1982, the lawmakers cut its budget by 25%, to $225 million, forcing the closing of 285 offices and the layoffs of nearly 1,800 lawyers. It also began to impose a series of restrictions on legal services funds, for example, limiting lobbying and rulemaking….

…The arrival of Bill Clinton’s administration brought new optimism … Congress approved a record $400 million for the agency in fiscal years 1994 and 1995….

…The political landscape, however, changed dramatically with the midterm elections….

…[In 1995] Congress…cut the $400 million LSC budget by $122 million. It also imposed sweeping restrictions, including bans on class actions, lobbying, welfare reform advocacy, representation of most aliens and prisoners, and collection of attorney fees….

And today, the House has proposed slashing LSC’s budget by $70 million, which, according to LSC’s board chair, could result in over 350 attorney layoffs as well as office closures at a time when need among clients is extraordinarily high.  Finally, when analyzing changes in funding over time, it’s always useful to put things in perspective by accounting for inflation’s effect on the dollar.  In doing so, we see that LSC is mired in the past:

If the $300 million grant to the LSC in 1980, which was intended to properly fund legal services in America, were adjusted for inflation, [LSC board chair John] Levi said, the LSC’s appropriation would be roughly $750 million.

$750, even though that would be no more than what LSC was funded over 30 years ago, is pie in the sky.  LSC will be fighting to keep funding in the $400 millions in the current budget debates.

The National Law Journal has just published “The Power of Hope,” which it bills as follows:

This week: Wisconsin budget controversy extends to the public interest community; NYT says don’t slash LSC funding; is “holistic defense” the future of indigent defense?; worries about government funding cuts for a Pennsylvania legal services program; the same worries are troubling California-based LSC grantees; and Uncle Sam wants to improve his intern hiring processes. 

• 3.10.11 – are you tired of news about acrimony surrounding the Wisconsin budget?  TOO BAD!   Not noticed amidst the recent political kerfuffle is the impact that the Gov. Scott Walker’s proposed budget would have on Badger State public interest lawyers.  Short version: very bad for civil legal services, maybe good for defenders, and good for some prosecutors.
  • a Wisconsin Law Journal blog post highlights the danger faced by the Wisconsin legal services community: “The current budget provides approximately $5 million for civil legal services for the poor….  The proposed cut would eliminate 75 percent of the grant money annually issued to legal service providers….  Legal Action of Wisconsin would suffer the biggest hit, losing almost $1.3 million in grant money for each of the next two years.”  Legal Action’s executive director stated that this could lead to cutting over 40% of the staff.  And they would not face adversity alone: “Ten other legal service providers including Wisconsin Judicare Inc., Legal Aid Society of Milwaukee and Disability Rights Wisconsin would lose out on substantial grant money through WisTAF, as well.”  With all of this bad news, the WLJ piece does note that public defenders may have reason to sing a happier tune: The governor’s “budget proposal allocates approximately $10 million to support additional staff attorneys” at the State Public Defender’s office. The money would cover salaries and benefits for 45 new positions,.” according to the SPD.  Of course, nothing is guaranteed in this economic climate: “But agency officials are not taking anything for granted, given the SPD could also be adversely impacted by the passage of Walker’s budget repair bill.  The SPD is among 13 state agencies facing layoffs as a result of delayed passage of the state budget.”
  • Last week the Wisconsin State Bar weighed in on the budget proposal.  Reaction is mixed.  It is good news that the proposal would “[p]rovide funding for 45 new positions at the State Public Defender to handle workload generated by [recently expanded indigent eligibility guidelines].”  It’s also good to hear that funding is coming for experienced-prosecutor salary boosts.  But there’s bad news: “Unfortunately, much of the additional money designated in the budget bills for prosecutors and court interpreters comes from the elimination of funding for two initiatives the State Bar also strongly supports, indigent civil legal needs and data collection to study the extent of racial profiling in Wisconsin.”

• 3.8.11 – the New York Times editorial board opposes a proposal in Congress to slash Legal Services Corporation funding.  “House Republicans voted to cut $83 million from President Obama’s request for the Legal Services Corporation, the federally financed nonprofit program that provides civil legal help to low-income Americans….  Deficit-ridden states have cut their support for these civil legal services programs. Another source of financing — interest earned on lawyers’ escrow accounts — has evaporated because of historically low interest rates. That makes federal dollars even more crucial. Given the economic crisis, and the long line of desperate clients, this is the worst time to be cutting federal support for civil legal services.” 

• 3.8.11 – the Crime Report looks at the increasing popularity of “holistic defense” in providing indigent defense services, highlighting the work of The Bronx Defenders, which provides a wide range of services to indigent defendants in order to help them not only with the immediate criminal issues but to prevent adverse collateral consequences and to help clients steer clear of trouble in the future.  The Bronx Defenders “deploys an interdisciplinary team of criminal, civil and family defense lawyers, social workers, parent advocates, investigators, and community organizers created to serve clients and their families…”  The program has been viewed as a success.  As a result, the Department of Justice has given The Bronx Defenders grants to offer technical assistance to other indigent defense programs.  Nevertheless, observers in the indigent defense community are looking for more hard data to measure whether or not holistic defense present a viable means of reducing recidivism and strengthening communities.

• 3.7.11 – Mid-Penn Legal Services is featured in a piece about how federal and state budget cuts may impact social services providers who work with society’s most vulnerable in Central Pennsylvania.   As reported in the Chambersburg Public Opinion, Mid-Penn executive director James Kearney noted that, “‘We are already stretched to the max … We only take the most critical cases, we are concerned.'”  Even at its current funding level Mid-Penn “turns away about half of the low-income people who come for help in civil court cases.”

• 3.6.11 – The Ventura County Star looks at potential LSC funding cuts and how they may impact LSC grantees in the Golden State.  “California-based LSC programs received $51 million for fiscal year 2010. The House bill would reduce funding for California programs by $9 million, LSC spokesman Steve Barr said.”  California Rural Legal Assistance “would lose $2 million of its funding and 15 of its 100 lawyers.”  The Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA) “received $9.3 million from LSC in 2010 and has been analyzing potential impacts of the proposed cuts.  According to Silvia Arqueta, LAFLA’s executive director, cuts could mean up to a 25% reduction in services provided to clients.

• 3.4.11 – Government Executive website has a piece about a proposal in the House aiming to improve the process for recruiting and retaining (as future employees) federal interns.  “Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., on Thursday introduced the 2011 Federal Internship Improvement Act (H.R. 914) to increase the number of government interns who are converted to full-time employees. This legislation would establish reporting requirements so that the Office of Personnel Management could evaluate agencies’ implementation of intern programs based on conversion rates, as well as determine the quality of those programs through exit interviews. It also would also establish a central clearinghouse so that agencies can recruit qualified candidates who interned for another agency … Connolly expressed concern that agencies convert just 6.6 percent of interns to full-time employees compared with more than 50 percent in the private sector. Government will have to fill more than 200,000 mission-critical jobs in the next three years, he wrote.”