In summary…there’s a lot of public interest news this week.  Unfortunately, a lot of it’s not good.  Funding shortages are affecting public interest programs literally from the Mexican to the Canadian borders.  Featured: the “Last Resort Exoneration Project” is released at Seton Hall Law; a young lawyer weighs the virtues of Model Rule 6.1; apparent financial trouble at AppalReD leads to the ED’s firing; farewell to a titan among federal defenders; the North Carolina State Bar is trying to ramp up pro bono efforts; cuts in local funding for a Louisiana legal services provider; unbundling legal services to serve more low-income Mississippians; fighting against food stamp terminations in Washington State; potential staff layoffs at Rhode Island Legal Services ruffle union feathers; the Colorado criminal defense bar is fighting for easier access to public defenders; loan repayment for Illinois prosecutors and public defenders; an office closure by New Mexico Legal Aid; discontinuing the Homeless Rights Project in San Francisco; arguments for permitting easier public access to juvenile court records and proceedings; the fight continues over an indigent defense attorney assignment overhaul in the Big Apple (or in French: le Big Apple); will the planned closure of a Southern Arizona Legal Aid office be avoided?; the Maine Commission on Indigent Legal Services is running out of funds; financial support for legal services for artists; New York’s top jurist calls upon the bar to support pro bono and legal services funding; legal services funding woes in Texas; Washington State high court arguments about a foster child’s right to counsel.   

• 2.3.11 – a New Jersey Star-Ledger blog highlights the launch of the “Last Resort Exoneration Project” at Seton Hall Law School.  The project will work to free innocent convicts, but unlike the high-profile Innocence Project, the Exoneration Project will focus on cases where DNA evidence is not in play – no meager feat.  The new initiative is something of a family affair.  Exoneration Project director Lesley Risinger first worked to free an innocent convict before attending law school; she enlisted the help of her mother, an attorney.  Now a lawyer herself, Risinger will co-direct the project with her husband, a Seton Hall Law professor.

• 2.3.11 – on the Minnesota Lawyer’s JDs Rising Blog, a newly admitted attorney explores Model Rule of Professional Conduct 6.1 – the pro bono rule – wondering whether it’s ultimately beneficial or too restrictive that lawyers are called upon to provide legal services and to support legal services for the poor rather than being able to provide service/contributions outside of the legal arena.

• 2.2.11 – from the Lexington Herald-Leader: “The main provider of civil legal help for poor people in Eastern Kentucky has fired its director and cut several other staff positions after an internal investigation.  The board of Appalachian Research and Defense Fund, a publicly funded legal aid agency, fired Cynthia Elliott on Saturday after finishing the internal review … AppalReD has total annual funding of $4.3 million, interim director Jonathan Picklesimer said Wednesday, and during the past four years it might have overspent its budget by nearly $1 million.”  The story later notes that the “other staff positions” which were cut were done so for financial reasons, according to AppalReD’s board chairman, not reasons related directly to the investigation.

• 2.2.11 – the New York Times has a nice write-up on the retirement of New York City’s chief federal defender, who has earned the respect of judges and legal adversaries and whose office has handled myriad high- and low-profile matters in Manhattan and Brooklyn.  “Leonard F. Joy, the lawyer who has led New York’s influential federal public defender’s office for the last two decades, is retiring this month, ending a tenure during which his office represented some of the most infamous defendants being prosecuted by the United States attorney’s offices in Manhattan and Brooklyn.”

• 2.2.11 – a piece in the Raleigh News Observer highlights the North Carolina State Bar’s efforts to promote increased pro bono by 1) recommending in a new rule of conduct that attorneys complete 50 hours of pro bono annually, and 2) strengthening its ties with Legal Aid of North Carolina (LANC).  The piece further notes that LANC is facing possible funding cuts out of the $5 million it presently receives from the state.  Even with things as they are now, LANC “can only take up [to] two cases for every 10 received.”    

• 2.2.11 – the Louisiana-based Tri-Parish Times reports on local funding cuts to legal services: “Low-income individuals and families that have depended upon or might need legal assistance when dealing with civil matters in Louisiana could be left without representation as parishes cut back on their budgets in 2011.  Capital Area Legal Services Corp., which has been funded by contributions from 12 parishes…is faced with a loss of financial support that could range from $24,530 to $47,330 this year. In turn, the legal aid agency could soon be faced with cutting some of its services.”   

• 2.2.11 – the AP reports that, at the proposal of Mississippi’s Access to Justice Commission, the state’s high court has adopted a rule permitting limited scope representation so that attorneys may provide unbundled services to clients who can not afford full-scope representation.  “Chief Justice Bill Waller Jr. said the limited scope representation rule is to encourage lawyers to provide some services to clients who are limited in what they can afford. He said the revised rules also encourage lawyers to provide volunteer services to legal hotlines and clinics without fear of creating conflicts of interest.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Know a worthwhile attorney or organization?  Nominate them!  Here’s an email we got from our friends at the ABA Center for Pro Bono:

Each year the Standing Committee on Pro Bono and Public Service presents five awards to individual lawyers and institutions in the legal profession that have demonstrated outstanding commitment to volunteer legal services for the poor and disadvantaged. The awards will next be presented at the Pro Bono Publico Awards Luncheon on Monday, August 8, 2011 at the ABA Annual Meeting in Toronto, Canada. 

To nominate an individual lawyer, small or large law firm, government attorney office, corporate law department or other institutions in the legal profession you will need to fill out our online nomination form.

Click here to submit your nomination of an individual.

Click here to submit your nomination of an institution.

We are actively seeking nominations of lawyers of color and institutions which are serving diverse communities.

*** Important Note:  The ABA website will be undergoing maintenance the first week of February and you will not be able to access the Awards criteria nomination guidelines and a list of past Award Winners.  The documents are attached to this email for your reference.

In addition to the on-line nomination form, which is submitted when you complete the form, the required nomination narrative and all supporting materials must be submitted via e-mail  to Meaghan.Sherer@americanbar.org by 5:00 pm CST on Monday, March 14, 2011. No extensions will be granted.

Here are the nomination criteria and application requirements.

This week: cultivating the next generation of public service lawyers at UCLA; speaking of L.A., funding for law and order isn’t great; $125K for foreclosure prevention in the Windy City; aspiring public defenders may want to look into getting barred in Massachusetts; Equal Justice Works hits the Big 2-5!; legal services for Gulf Coast oil spill victims; a wrongful imprisonment emphasizes the need for the Florida Innocence Commission’s work; let’s all celebrate the Greater Dayton Volunteer Lawyers Project; tough times and a leadership transition at the Georgia Public Defender Standards Council; the good work of the University of Louisville Law Clinic; a public-interest lawsuit targets allegedly excessive truancy fines; will Gideon finally be civil in California?; maybe he should be civil elsewhere, too.

• 1.28.11 – UCLA’s Daily Bruin features a short piece capturing the thoughts of Catherine Mayorkas, executive director of Public Interest Programs for the UCLA School of Law, on how the law school supports students exploring public-service career tracks – via an LRAP program, a Summer Public Interest Fellowship Program, etc. – while allowing those students to decide for themselves about whether public service is a long-term career destination. 

• 1.26.11 – in an indicator of the recession’s impact on state budgets, the Los Angeles County Superior Court system is bracing for continued fiscal strife.  From the National Law Journal (article may be password-protected): “Last year, the Superior Court, which employs 5,000 people and has 11 locations, laid off 329 employees and lost another 150 to attrition due to budget cuts, [Presiding Judge Lee] Edmon said. The cuts have resulted in long lines at filing windows and frustration among lawyers, she acknowledged. ‘Unfortunately, this pressure on the system will continue for some time.’ For the rest of the fiscal year, which ends on June 30, the system appears safe from any drastic measures due to last year’s efforts, which generated new sources of revenue from civil filing fees and funds redirected from new construction and computer projects.”  But looming on the horizon is Gov. Jerry Brown’s budget proposal, which “would eliminate more than $100 million from the Los Angeles Superior Court — about 10% of its annual budget, Edmon said.”  The article touches on the fact that 9th Circuit federal courts are strained as well, with a judicial emergency having been declared in the District of Arizona in the Tuscon shooting’s wake (link to more detailed coverage by the Arizona Republic).  

• 1.26.11 – funding for foreclosure prevention in Chicago.  Here’s a press release about a $125K joint donation made to the Chicago Bar Foundation, the funds from which will be divvied out to the Center for Conflict Resolution, the Chicago Legal Clinic, Chicago Volunteer Legal Services, and the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago to support local foreclosure prevention initiatives.  Good stuff.   The PSLawNet Blog is inclined to use this opportunity to poke some fun at our friend Bob Glaves, executive director of the Chicago Bar Foundation, on account of what we’re sure was the positively profound disappointment felt by Bob and all Bears fans upon their team’s utterly deflating playoff loss.  But the PSLawNet Blog is above such cheapshots.

• 1.25.11 – here comes the unusual scenario wherein the recession could create a whole bunch of public interest lawyer jobs.  The Boston Globe reports on Gov. Deval Patrick’s proposal calling for “the hiring of 1,000 lawyers under a new Department of Public Counsel Services within the executive branch, with up to 500 more support staff. The administration estimates its plan will save $45 million by eliminating the Committee for Public Counsel Services in the judicial branch and wiping out hourly legal wages paid out to roughly 3,000 lawyers who work on contracts.”  The proposal has caused a stir, particularly among those private counsel who are presently appointed, under the auspices of the judicial branch, to handle indigent defense matters. They argue that the program will result in cost increases.  How would Massachusetts stack up with other jurisdictions?: “According to the administration, 28 states have public counsel systems similar to the one Patrick outlined yesterday, and Massachusetts is one of six states whose public defenders fall within the judiciary.”   Beantown-based public radio station WBUR ran a piece on the controversy: “Although the findings show that public defenders are more effective in representing indigent defendants, the issue of cost is not as simple.”

• 1.25.11 – Congratulations, Equal Justice Works!  The organization which is responsible for launching so many public interest careers celebrates its 25th anniversary this year.  The 25th is a win-win for Equal Justice Works: a year of revelry and their car insurance is gonna go down.  (And if you thought that was bad, we were going to work in a “fellowSHIP is far from sinking” joke.)   

• 1.25.11 – the Mobile, Alabama-based Press-Register reports on legal services available to those affected by the Gulf Coast oil spill: “The Gulf Coast Claims Facility is funding 17 attorneys, one working part time, to offer free legal service to low-income claimants trying to recover losses caused by last year’s oil spill.  The Mississippi Center for Justice is spearheading the program, which involves a dozen legal aid groups from the affected Gulf Coast states, according to center spokeswoman Sharon Garrison.”  And while we hold Mobile in the highest regard, we just can’t help thinking about this song. 

• 1.24.11 – in the Orlando Sentinel, columnist Mike Thomas takes to task State Attorney Lawson Lamar, whom Thomas accuses of ignoring the role played by the prosecutor’s office in the imprisonment of a woman wrongfully convicted of vandalism.  The column notes that the prosecutor’s office was not alone in failing, and that other actors in the criminal justice system bear some responsibility as well.  Consequently, “[w]hat happened to [the wrongfully convicted Haitian woman, Malenne Joseph, who was indigent and could not afford her own counsel] is a perfect case study for the Innocence Commission.”  The Florida Innocence Commission is a government entity “established to provide a mechanism to recommend to the Supreme Court of Florida solutions to eliminate or significantly reduce the causes for wrongful or erroneous convictions.”

• 1.23.11 – the Dayton Daily News profiles the Greater Dayton Volunteer Lawyers Project, “a local program that helps people who are financially strained find lawyers who are willing to offer ‘pro bono’ work, or free services … Since 1988, the GDVLP has provided lawyers in more than 21,000 cases, providing more than $10 million in donated services to the poor … The GDVLP is located at the Dayton Bar Association and is supported by Legal Aid of Western Ohio. The program has 1,000 lawyers from various specialties who donate services.”

• 1.23.11 – the long-running funding woes afflicting Georgia’s indigent defense program persist.  The Associated Press reports that the incoming chief of the Georgia Public Defender Standards Council, who appeared to some a remarkable choice because of his background as a prosecutor, is inheriting a program that is short on funding, slated for additional budget cuts, and thin on staff as well.  Outside organizations have taken note of the GPDSC’s sorry state: “The specter of more legal challenges looms, as civil rights groups have filed one lawsuit after another that claimed the council failed its mission to provide adequate legal defense for Georgia’s poor defendants.”  Here’s information on a lawsuit filed last month from the Southern Center for Human Rights.   And here’s an additional blurb about discontent within the Peach State criminal defense community over th GPDSC’s present condition (from WALB, a Georgia-based NBC affiliate).  GPDSC’s new chief, Travis Sakrison, certainly does have his work cut out for him, and we wish him the best of luck. 

• 1.23.11 – the Louisville Courier Journal has a nice profile of the University of Louisville Law Clinic, through which law students represent low-income clients on a variety of matters, aiding, for instance domestic-violence victims and those facing evictions.  The piece emphasizes the hands-on experience that students acquire while making a difference in the local community.

• 1.20.11 – the Associated Press reports on a lawsuit initiated by the Philly-based Public Interest Law Center: “A federal lawsuit accuses a Pennsylvania school district of imposing excessive and illegal fines on truant children or their families, including one parent ordered to pay $27,000 and a 17-year-old student fined more than $12,000.   The suit against the Lebanon School District, filed Thursday in Harrisburg by the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia on behalf of four parents and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, targets the court-imposed fines it says were above the state’s limit of $300 per violation.

• Is Gideon coming to California?  ProBono.net’s January newsletter include a piece from our friend Tiela Chalmers, executive director of the San Francisco-based Volunteer Legal Services Program, who comments on common, public misperceptions about when poor people are entitled to a lawyer, and progress in California toward securing a right to counsel in cases that gravely affect family integrity and economic security.  “You’d be surprised how many well-educated adults – journalists, politicians – even judges – believe that poor people have a right to an attorney in civil cases.  Our belief in the fundamental fairness of our justice system leads us to assume that there is a right to counsel, at least when someone is faced with eviction, or a challenge to the custody of their children … But no, Virginia – there is no right to counsel in civil cases … One of the most remarkable legacies of our outgoing Chief Justice, Ronald George, is his hard work to gain passage of the Sargent Shriver Civil Counsel Act …  This Act uses a small court fee to fund the creation of pilot projects in California, to explore what the right to counsel might look like in civil cases where important rights are at stake.” 

• More Civil Gideon.  The winter edition of the Phildelphia Lawyer contains a terrific piece, by Community Legal Services’ Michael Carroll and Penn Law professor and clinical programs director Louis Rulli, entitled “Filling Gideon’s Empty Chair.”  The article reviews the history of efforts to secure a constitutionally-rooted right to counsel for the poor in non-criminal matters, which began in some ways with the Supreme Court’s rejection of that right in the Lassiter case.  It then reviews more recent initiatives designed to ensure that the poor have access to counsel in civil matters that threaten health, welfare, and family security, all the while noting how our adversarial justice system – designed with lawyers in mind – so poorly serves those who can not afford legal help. The article is a particularly good read for law students and attorneys who are acquainting themselves with the “Civil Gideon” movement.  For more information we recommend exploring the National Coalition for a Civil Right to Counsel’s website.

We know that many of our readers – law students and attorneys – work with clients in poverty.  And while public interest lawyers are hardly raking in the bucks on payday, most of us don’t know what it’s like to try to make ends meet at or below the poverty line (although more and more families have relied on Food Stamps since the recession).  The Food Stamp Challenge is a small-but-signficant way to better understand your clients’ struggles.

Maryland Hunger Solutions is sponsoring the Food Stamp Challenge.  We’re a little late to the punch on this one: the official week-long Challenge period started yesterday and runs through 1/31.  But you can pretty much take the Challenge on your own time.  MHS’s Challenge is straightforward: could you live on a food budget of no more than $4.30 per day for a week?  ($4.30 is the average, daily food stamp benefit for an individual in Maryland.  You could find out the benefit in your area via the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service website.  Those who are not intimately familiar with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, a/k/a “Food Stamps”, might be surprised to learn that it’s administered by the USDA, not by Health and Human Services, as is commonly thought.  There’s a ton of data online about the food stamp program generally and the signficant rise in food stamp usage as more and more American families slipped into poverty during the recession.  If you wish to learn more you can start with the USDA’s data.  And note that according to the New York Times, in 2009 Food Stamps were feeding 1 in 8 Americans and 1 in 4 children.)

Here are the MHS’s Challenge Guidelines, which were shared with us by the good folks at AARP Maryland, who are participating this week:

What are the guidelines for the Challenge?

1. Each person should spend a set amount for food and beverages during the Challenge week. That amount is $30 for all food and beverage.
2. All food purchased and eaten during the Challenge week, including fast food and dining out, must be included in the total spending.
3. During the Challenge, only eat food that you purchase for the project. Do not eat food that you already own (this does not include spices and condiments).
4. Avoid accepting free food from friends, family, or at work, including at receptions or briefings.
5. Please keep track of receipts on food spending and take note of your experiences throughout the week.
6. Invite others to join you, including co-workers, reporters, chefs, or other elected officials.

This week: LSC on federal budget chopping block?; everything’s bigger in Texas, and hopefully that includes state funding of legal services; it does seem to include funding for innocence clinics at four Lone Star State law schools; get hitched to fund legal services in Idaho; mourning Sargent Shriver’s passing; state budgets in terrible shape; death penalty debate in Illinois could signify changes in other jurisdictions; NYC public interest and pro bono lawyers racing the clock to help Haitian immigrants; an expanded LRAP program at Boston College Law; commendable pro bono contributions from New York lawyers; an appeal for more pro bono from Pennsylvania’s top jurist; how do you prosecute a defendant who is deaf, mute, and unable to read or understand sign language?

• 1.20.11 – not exactly a surprise, but the Legal Services Corporation won’t be invited to a tea party anytime soon.  From the Associated Press: “A proposal unveiled by the Republican Study Committee, whose conservative members make up about three-fourths of the House GOP conference, called for bringing domestic agency budgets down to the 2006 levels in place when Republicans last controlled Congress. That’s about a $175 billion cut from current levels and roughly $90 billion more than the cuts promised by Republicans last fall … The study committee proposed eliminating several programs outright, including the Legal Services Corporation, which provides legal help to people who can’t afford a lawyer….”  A Washington Post article does a good job of putting this spending proposal into context as debate over the federal budget promises to heat up in the coming weeks.

• 1.20.11 – an editorial in the San Antonio Express makes the case for preserving state funding for legal services.  The piece notes that in its last session the state government “provided some much needed one-time support in the form of a $20 million allocation in anticipation that the economy would get better and the IOLTA funding would go back to its former levels.”  But the financial circumstances for the legal services community have not markedly improved; they are in fact still “in crisis.”  Texas’s attorneys have contributed $700,000 via bar dues, and they have given generously of their time through pro bono efforts.  But the legislature must step up to the plate again by sustaining its funding.

• 1.19.11 – moving along to some better funding news out of Texas, the Dallas Morning News’s Trailblazers Blog notes that “…the $400,000 of funding allotted to the innocence clinics at the University of Texas, Texas Tech University, University of Houston and Texas Southern University law schools had not been slashed in the base House budget released late Tuesday night.”  The clinics have cleared 11 people who were wrongly convicted of crimes, and there is evidently more work to do in the Lone Star State.  We noted one of the more dramatic instances of a wrongful conviction’s undoing in our January 7 News Bulletin: a man who’d served 30 years in prison before being cleared by DNA evidence.

• 1.19.11 – Want to support legal services in Idaho?  Tie the knot.  In his annual “state of the judiciary” speech, the Gem State’s top jurist, Justice Daniel Eismann, lamented the fact that so many Idahoan families and children are unable to afford counsel in domestic relations and other cases.  The Spokesman Review reports that Justice Eismann proposed boosting the cost of marriage licenses by $20; this would yield about $280K per year which could fund civil legal services.

Keep reading . . .

So perhaps you are still deeply torn over whether or not Brad cheated on Jen with Angelina . . . or perhaps you don’t care at all and if stopped on the street and asked how many kids currently run in the Brangelina pack would not have a clue.  Either way, we here at the PSLawNet Blog thought you would be interested to learn that earlier this month Nathalie Nozile was named the first ever Jolie Legal Fellow.  Ms. Nozile is a 2010 graduate of the University of Florida’s Levin College of Law.

The Jolie Legal Fellowship, created and funded by the Jolie-Pitt Foundation, supports the Government of Haiti’s ongoing efforts to strengthen the Haitian judicial system in the challenging post-earthquake environment. Jolie Legal Fellows are attorneys who will concentrate on the protection of Haiti’s most vulnerable children in the judicial system, by serving as special assistants to key Government of Haiti officials. Ms. Nozile leaves for Haiti later this month to begin her work.

‘I am thrilled that Nathalie Nozile will be our first legal fellow in Haiti – where the need to enhance child protection is so great,’ said Angelina Jolie. ‘Nathalie has a heartfelt commitment to improve conditions in her homeland, and brings to her work the unique perspective of growing up in an SOS Village. There, she learned firsthand the importance to a childhood of a stable and nurturing environment. Now, as a promising attorney, she will draw on her personal experience as she returns to help strengthen the Haitian judicial system. Nathalie will be working to help ensure equal access to justice and the protection of children’s rights in Haiti.’

Ms. Nozile, who made it a priority to volunteer in Haiti in the aftermath of the earthquake in the SOS Office of Emergency Programs, expressed her gratitude for this opportunity: ‘It is a great privilege and honor to become the first Jolie Legal Fellow. I made a decision to obtain a law degree long ago so that I could return to Haiti to serve my country, now in such a critical state. I hope my commitment will inspire more young professionals to return to Haiti, because Haiti needs us all.’

Ms. Jolie concluded with her impression that . . .

‘Nathalie is a force … just wait and see. She will be doing many great things. She represents the best of Haiti. She is an extraordinary example. I am proud to know her and extremely grateful to have the opportunity to work with her.’

Congrats to Nathalie and best of luck with her work in Haiti!

If you enjoyed this bit of good news about recovery efforts in Haiti, check out our piece from last week featuring the pro bono work of a Rutgers University School of Law-Newark alum, Ralph Delouis.

Just can’t get enough of the Jolie Pitt Foundation?  To learn more about their efforts go here.

Lastly, we would like to thank our colleague Millie Bond, the NALP/Street Law Legal Diversity Pipeline Program Fellow for giving us the lead on this story.  Check out her weekly Diversity Dish on the NALPComments! Blog.

Earlier this month we blogged about Vermont Law School’s release of its inaugural “Top Ten Environmental Watch List.” This past weekend The Burlington Free Press took note of both the local and global impact of Vermont Law School’s environmental focus.

Environmental lawyers. Vermont Law School turns out scores of them every year, and they’re sprinkled through congressional staffs, state and federal regulatory agencies, environmental advocacy organizations and private law firms that take on environmental cases.

According to Marc Mihaly, the Director of the school’s Environmental Law Center,

‘We’re better known outside the state than inside,’ said Marc Mihaly, director of the law school’s Environmental Law Center. ‘Everybody knows us in China.’

By ‘everybody,’ he meant the few Chinese lawyers who specialize in environmental law, many of whom have either visited South Royalton or participated in conferences that Vermont Law School has organized in China. With a State Department grant, the school is training environmental advocates at Chinese law schools and helping to set up an environmental law firm in Beijing. Meanwhile, Vermont law students conduct collaborative research on environmental issues with their counterparts in China.

For potential law students that are interested in practicing environmental law the school offers a robust program:

Students can choose from more than 60 courses with an environmental focus — ranging from land-conservation law to climate change litigation.

They can work in environmental clinics that handle real cases for real clients — a form of experiential education that’s being promoted at law schools generally. Mark Foster, a third-year student who’s on the editorial board of the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, recalls working on a friend-of-the-court brief that figured in to a decision by the Montana Supreme Court — an achievement that gave him ‘a very empowering feeling.’

We leave you with this fun fact for the road:  one student decided to attend the school’s L.L.M. program in part because ‘[i]t was the only law school that rented cross-country skis out of the bookstore.’

The National Law Journal’s Tony Mauro just wrote a piece about the push by the Illinois state legislature to repeal the death penalty in the Land of Lincoln.

On Jan. 11, the Illinois Senate passed a repeal measure by a 35-22 vote, five days after the state house approved the measure, 60-54. Gov. Pat Quinn, a Democrat, is weighing whether to sign or veto the bill, with his timetable and ultimate decision uncertain. But death penalty opponents are already allowing themselves to contemplate that a major Midwestern state, not known as light on crime, is about to take a dramatic stand against the death penalty.

Why is movement in this one state watched by death penalty opponents and proponents alike?  Well, Illinois may be a bellwether state because of its position near the middle of the cultural/political spectrum.  It is a Midwestern state that is neither as socially conservative as many Southern states nor as progressive as many Northeastern states.  And, if we view Illinois as a laboratory where experiments on this nationally-divisive issue have been taking place, it’s been a busy one:

For the past decade, most of the arguments in the death penalty debate have played themselves out in Illinois. In 2000, Gov. George Ryan declared a moratorium on executions, humbled by the number of death row inmates who were being freed on new evidence of innocence — much of it dug up by students at Northwestern University. Two commissions looked at the capital punishment system, and the legislature enacted reforms. But exonerations continued, and now the legislature has, in effect, thrown up its hands.

The NLJ piece further notes – and this has been discussed elsewhere recently – that it’s no coincidence that a capital-punishment repeal is considered at a time of state budgetary woes.  Maintaining a death penalty program is very expensive, in large part because of the costs of the appellate process (which, in the PSLawNet Blog’s opinion is absolutely necessary in capital-punishment jurisdictions since, even with sophisticates appellate processes in place, innocent people are still executed). 

Here’s some reaction to the legislature’s votes from the Chicago Tribune and the Sun-Times.  And here’s an editorial from the Peoria Journal Star, which ran before the Senate repeal vote, in favor of the repeal:

In good conscience it is impossible to slough off as no big deal the fact that Illinois came so close to killing 20 innocent people. In fact the state has freed more Death Row inmates than it has actually executed – 12 – since 1977 (which also was true even before the moratorium). That’s not proof the system worked, as some have argued, but that it failed miserably and would have done so fatally but for the efforts of advocates on a mission. Many of these guys may not be saints, but you don’t steal an innocent man’s freedom, family and irretrievable time and say the system “worked.”

A Symposium entitled Keeping the Needs of Students with Disabilities on the Agenda:  Current Issues in Special Education Advocacy is being presented by the American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law and The Washington College of Law Disability Rights Law Clinic on February 25, 2011 at American University, Washington College of Law in Washington, D.C.

While the school house doors have technically been opened to students with disabilities, children, parents, advocates, teachers, and education officials face new challenges in this era of school reform and of difficult financial constraints that states and local school districts are experiencing. As schools and the systems that govern them, in the wake of a financial crisis and in an era of school reform, aim to improve the quality of public education in school districts across the nation, it is more important than ever that the needs of special education students remain on the agenda. Individual advocacy strategies and systemic reform efforts are adapting to take on these new challenges. This symposium provide a forum for academics and practitioners to discuss these and other issues related to special education advocacy in today’s times. Expert panelists from across the country will discuss current issues in this evolving field and Alexa Posny, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services at the U.S. Department of Education, will provide a keynote address.

Admission to the symposium is free to the general public, but registration is required.  To learn more and register go here.

This week: we begin with an exciting announcement about…case management software(!), but then we move on to a profile of Chicago’s Cabrini Green Legal Aid; kudos for a Florida-based Equal Justice Works fellow; the ABA wants guaranteed counsel in civil contempt proceedings; profiles of Judy Clarke, the accomplished federal defender who will represent accused killer  Jared Loughner; a NOLA administrative battle has judges squaring off against the DA and public defender; thoughts from a deferred associate leaving Texas RioGrande Legal Aid; UNC law forges a new pro bono partnership; a statewide legal services hotline is launched in Oklahoma; Legal Aid of East Tennessee gets $125K in IOLTA revenue; free legal help for Staten Islanders facing debt collection cases; and office/staff constriction at Southern Arizona Legal Aid.

• 1.13.11 – looking for new case management software, legal services providers?  According to a press release, “Technology consulting firm Urban Insight today announced a donation of nearly $100,000 in free software to help nonprofit legal services organizations that serve millions of residents in 12 states … Urban Insight’s free and open source software, called Drupal for Legal Aid Websites, or DLAW, enables legal aid programs to affordably manage complex websites using only a web browser … DLAW is developed and maintained in the public interest by Urban Insight in collaboration with Legal Services National Technology Assistant Project (LSNTAP), Idaho Legal Aid Services (ILAS) and legal aid organizations from Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Vermont and West Virginia. Original development of the software was funded through a Legal Services Corporation Technology Initiative Grant.  More information about DLAW is available on a special website, www.legalaidtech.org, where legal aid organizations can also download the latest version of the software for free.”

• 1.12.11 – the Huffington Post has a nice, albeit brief, profile of Chicago-based Cabrini Green Legal Aid.  “The Cabrini Green Legal Aid (CGLA) has provided free legal services to Chicagoans since 1973 and represents residents in the city living below the poverty level.  From family and housing law to criminal defense, CGLA wants all residents to know their options.”

• 1.12.11 – hey, wait a minute.  More Huffington Post.  And, only a week after naming an Equal Justice Works fellow its “Greatest Person of the Day” (Anneliese Gryta – 1/4/11), Huffington Post did it again.  January 11’s Greatest Person of the Day was Equal Justice Works Fellow Peterson St. Philippe of Gulf Coast Legal Services in Tampa, FL.  “[A]s an Equal Justice Works Fellow working with Gulf Coast Legal Services, Peterson finds himself in a prime position to give back. For Haitian immigrants who arrived before the quake, he assists in filing for Temporary Protected Status–letting them stay and work here for up to 18 months.  But for survivors who fled to America after the quake, the legal options differ. Typically granted temporary visa status, these immigrants cannot legally work or drive a car, leaving them stranded in legal limbo. Many of these people have nothing to go back to in Haiti, where they have lost homes and family members.”  While both Gryta and St. Philippe are doing great work and undoubtedly deserve this kind of recognition, we at the PSLawNet Blog find it curious that two EJW fellows have been featured in consecutive weeks.  As it happens, we’re going to happy hour with a friend from EJW this evening.  We’ll get to the bottom of this.  We’ll likely also stick our friend with the bar bill, but let’s keep that between us.

• 1.12.10 – the ABA has filed an amicus brief in a Supreme Court case – Turner v. Rogers, to be argued on March 23 – asserting “that poor people should have the right to a lawyer in civil contempt proceedings carrying a threat of jail time … According to the brief (PDF), the ABA has concluded that low-income people should have a right to counsel in adversarial proceedings where basic human needs are at stake, such as those involving sustenance, safety, health, or child custody determinations. The rationale underlying this position also supports a right to counsel in civil contempt cases where an indigent defendant faces possible jail time.”

• 1.10.11 – the New York Times and the San Diego Union-Tribune are among many news outlets that have written about the federal defender who will represent accused Tucson killer Jared Loughner.  Judy Clarke’s record of helping defendants in high-profile cases avoid the death penalty is remarkable.  From the Times piece, which refers to Clarke as a “master strategist”: “The capital-defense lawyer who will represent Jared L. Loughner in the shootings in Tucson, Judy Clarke, is a well-known public defender who gets life sentences in cases that often begin with emotional calls for the death penalty.  Ms. Clarke has helped a number of infamous defendants avoid death sentences, including Theodore J. Kaczynski, the Unabomber; Eric Robert Rudolph, the Atlanta Olympics bomber; and Susan Smith, the South Carolina woman who drowned her toddlers.”  The Union-Tribune article focuses on Clarke’s low-key personality, work ethic, and her passion for making the justice system work fairly for those accused of crimes.  “Those who know her say she’s the most low-profile high-profile attorney in the country — she doesn’t chase after cases and she doesn’t do press conferences. All she does is work.”

• 1.10.11 – according to the New Orleans Times Picayune, a strange battle is playing out in New Orleans criminal courts regarding the system for assigning cases to judges.  “The DA’s office and public defenders want a system that allows them to better manage their offices by assigning cases to a judge the moment a person is arrested. This summer, the judges agreed to that change, but then three months later scrapped it, saying it wasn’t fairly distributing cases.”  And what’s a courtroom – or courthouse – drama without dueling experts?  The judges abandoned the new system after a report from the National Center for State Courts (which had been commissioned by the judges) found that the system created an imbalanced workload from judge to judge.  Not to be outdone, though, the DA and PD can point to a recent report from the New Orleans inspector general’s office which is critical of the NCSC report. The latest is that the judges are commissioning yet another study.  The “battle of the experts” may end up being a battle of attrition.  (Here, by the way, is a Times Picayune editorial siding with the DA and PD.)

• 1.10.11 – the TRLA Times, a newsletter run by Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, features a post by an outgoing Sidley Austin deferred associate who spent a year in TRLA’s Austin office defending low-income clients who were facing eviction actions.  Vijay Desai ran a trial within his first month of work (lost, but learned a lot), and through the course of his year got a lot of litigation skills under his belt.  Here’s how he closed the piece: “Finally, I learned that legal aid attorneys and staff are among the most decent human beings I have ever met.  I do not know where it begins, but the greatest characteristic I can identify is their unshakable passion for helping the helpless.  Advice from one of my supervisors almost always begins with ‘It’s just not right!  They shouldn’t be allowed to do this.’  And I have never worked in an environment where my supervisors were so enthusiastic about stopping everything they were doing to answer my questions … I am still whole-heartedly committed to my career in IP law, but now I have a new commitment to continue housing pro bono work as well.  Sidley Austin is gaining more than an attorney – they are gaining an associate who knows that his strength lies less in his one year of knowledge and more in his friends at TRLA who will always be his mentors.”

• 1.9.11 – more news about law schools entering into pro bono partnerships with legal services providers in order to help the rising numbers of low-income clients who seek assistance.  Chapel Hill News reports that “[t]he Pittsboro Office of Legal Aid of North Carolina has partnered with the UNC School of Law to assist qualifying low-income Orange County residents seeking divorces.  Under the partnership, UNC law students who are committed to providing access to justice for people of modest means will represent clients under the supervision [of a clinical professor].”

• 1.8.11 – Legal services news from Oklahoma.  The Enid News & Eagle (great name! – why just get news when you can get it with an eagle!?) reports that “Legal Aid Services of Oklahoma has launched a statewide phone line to better serve low-income and elderly Oklahomans facing civil legal problems.”

• 1.8.11 – from the Daily Times in the Volunteer State, we learn that the “Tennessee Bar Foundation has awarded Legal Aid of East Tennessee a $129,467 grant from its IOLTA (Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts) program to be used to provide critical civil legal services to the abused, impoverished and elderly during 2011 … Even with this generous grant award, there are thousands more that need LAET’s help. It is estimated that more than 300,000 persons in the LAET service area are eligible for services, yet limited resources allow LAET to serve less than 5 percent of the legal needs of this population.”

• 1.8.11 – according to a report from the NYC-based CBS radio affiliate, Staten Island lawyers are teaming up to provide free legal help to the increased numbers of New Yorkers facing consumer debt collection actions.  “In 2009, more than 15,000 collection cases were filed, according to the [Richmond County Bar] Association, and only 1 percent of the defendants had legal representation.  [The bar] formed a civil legal advice and resource office to provide free legal aid.

• 1.7.11 – We end the digest, unfortunately, with some bad news out of the Arizona legal services community.  The Nogales International reports that budget strains have taken a toll on Southern Arizona Legal Aid, which last week shuttered its Santa Cruz County office and let two staffers go.  SALA is looking for free office space now, and the county attorney, who referred many cases to SALA, is supportive of a continued presence.  Like a lot of providers, the main culprit causing SALA’s budget woes is a huge falloff of IOLTA funding – 50% in this case.