The Connecticut Attorney General has issued cease and desist orders to 30 banks, real estate companies, and landlords who have violated federal law by evicting rental tenants living in foreclosed properties without proper notice. The New Haven Register reports on the state’s efforts, though legal aid lawyers there note that this is a problem occuring nationwide. In recognition of the unique plight of renters in the foreclosure crisis, Congress passed the Protecting Tenants At Foreclosure Act last year, which requires that tenants be given at least 90 days notice before they can be evicted.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition has been tracking news and developments concerning renters in this situation, and have collected stories of tenants being evicted with next to no notice, repairs being left undone to try to force tenants out, and more. NLIHC also provides a free webinar and toolkit for those assisting tenants facing eviction due to foreclosure.

The National Law Journal reports on a report released today by a pro bono team from the law firm of Arnold and Porter, which spent a year investigating the immigration court system and making recommendations for systematic improvement. The team was headed by Lawrence Schneider, who heads Arnold and Porter’s international trade practice, and was completed at the request of the ABA Commission on Immigration.

The report found major problems linked to the high case load immigration courts face, such as judicial burnout and ineffective appellate review. The report also noted unacceptable levels of bias from judges and disparities between judges in similar cases, raising important due process concerns. The report makes many recommendations, including making immigration courts Article I courts, hiring at least 100 new judges over the next three or four years, increasing the number of law clerks, and improving representation for those involved in immigration proceedings.

The report is being unveiled this morning, and if it becomes available publicly we will link to it here.

Edited to add: The ABA Journal just posted a story on the report that has some more details on where the recommendations might go from here, and the Executive Summary of the report is now available (pdf).

• 1.21.10 – Cloud Computing Journal (running a Business Wire piece) – $2 million in cy pres funds resulting from an $11.5 million class-action settlement in California will go to legal services and other public interest organizations.  Beneficiaries of the funding windfall include Public Counsel, Bet Tzedek Legal Services, East Bay Community Law Center, and the Legal Aid Society of San Diego.  Link to press release.

• 1.19.10 – Government Executive newsletter – by 2013, 78% of federal, administrative law judges will be eligible for retirement.  (Over 50% are eligible now.)  Feeling the pressure to beef up their ranks, agencies that “rely most heavily on [ALJs]…would like to be able to hire them for specialized knowledge” and “find ways to have conversations about [their] job performance without infringing on judicial independence.”  Link to article.

• 1.18.10 – Kitsap Sun (Washington State) – in the wake of a statewide initiative to bolster the indigent defense network, Kitsap County, in Washington State, “began dramatically reshaping how the indigent are represented in criminal court” by creating an Office of Public Defense.  Having “in-house” public defenders has proven highly cost-effective; it costs the government about one-half the amount to have a staff public defender handling felonies than it would to contract with outside counsel.  The OPD’s supervising attorney “anticipates that the county will hire even more public defenders.”  Link to article.

• 1.18.10 – New York Times “City Room” Blog  – in a  follow-up to a blog post last week describing the public interest placement experience of deferred Ropes & Gray associate Chris Reid, Mr. Reid offers thoughtful answers to questions raised by readers of the original blog post.  Mr. Reid’s responses address his adjustment to a chaotic practice setting (housing court), the rewards of his immersion into public-interest culture, and how this experience may change his approach to practice when he returns to the private bar.  Link to article.

• 1.18.10 – Milwaukee Journal Sentinel – the Wisconsin Department of Corrections has sent letters to some former inmates who have completed their sentences, demanding that they submit DNA samples or face possible prosecution.  However, the state’s DNA submission law does not “expressly say that offenders are still obligated to submit DNA if they are no longer in prison, on probation or on parole.”  Some critics charge that the Department of Corrections may be exceeding its statutory authority, giving the former inmates an easy ground for suppression should their DNA be used against them in a future criminal proceeding.  Link to article.

• 1.17.10 – “Ozarks First” Website – (including video report) – the amount of low-income applicants seeking help from Legal Services of Southern Missouri has risen by 20% in just one year.  And “[b]ecause of our funding we can’t help everyone,” according to the group’s executive director, who further notes that, “[w]e’re turning away a lot of people who are income eligible.”  This leads some low-income Missourians to take a do-it-yourself approach to resolving their legal problems.  Link to article.

• 1.16.10 – Chicago Public Radio – the business of Cook County’s Central Bond Court takes place at a frenzied pace, as judges, prosecutors, and defense counsel race through bond/bail hearings for newly charged defendants.  This very rapid spinning of the wheels of justice – an average hearing lasts 47 seconds – concerns some critics, who question how justice can be done with so little time devoted to many cases, and who also note that defendants’ fates vary considerably from judge to judge.  Link to story.

Chicago Public Radio has a fascinating story on the inner workings of Cook County Bond Court – the court that sets bail for defendants awaiting trial. Cook County has one of the most over-worked bond courts in the country, with the average hearing lasting 47 seconds (leading some critics to call the proceedings an unconstitutional denial of due process). This article provides a unique and rarely-shared view into an important part of the work of public defenders and prosecutors.

A recurring feature on the blog will be “Five Questions for a Public Interest Leader” – a short interview with a variety of public interest legal leaders including non-profit directors, public defenders, law school administrators, and more. For our third “Five Questions” we turn to the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG), which includes the Attorneys General from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, as well as the United States Commonwealths and Territories. NAAG works to “foster interstate cooperation on legal and law enforcement issues, conducts policy research and analysis of issues, conducts training, and facilitates communication between the states’ chief legal officers and all levels of government.”

Now, the five questions!

The National Law Journal reported today that applications for federal clerkships went up over 60% in 2009. Another important trend noted was that over 50% of the applicants were law school graduates rather than students in their final year (up from just 18% in 2005). This is reflecting significant changes in how graduating students can pursue immediate post-grad opportunities, as well as shifts in what jobs currently employed (or recently laid-off) attorneys are seeking out. The article highlights the importance of networking and internships as ways to get your foot in the door – as judges are overwhelmed by the number of online applicants they are relying more and more on these traditional methods to hire their clerks.

My colleague Katie put up an excellent post about public interest networking last week.  It reminded me that I was asked several months ago to explain networking’s usefulness.

I’ll go into the answer I came up with below.  First, though, for context, I will note that I was diametrically opposed to the concept of networking while in law school.  In fact, I refused on principle to use the word “network” as a verb.  Six years later, my professional network is by far my most valuable asset.  This is in large part due to the fact that I have come to disassociate “networking” (which allows us to achieve professional goals by working with others) from “schmoozing” (which allows us to learn how to hold a wine glass and plate in one hand while shaking hands with the other).  I thought networking and schmoozing were one and the same.  I was wrong.  Networking is a necessary undertaking for professional success.

Click through to learn about the importance of networking…

The Partnership for Public Service (whose mission is to “revitalize our federal government by inspiring a new generation to serve and by transforming the way government works”) has a weekly feature in the Washington Post titled “Federal Player of the Week.” This week’s profile in particular caught our eye – Christina Stanford is an attorney in the Office of Legal Advisor in the U.S. Department of State. She discusses the breadth of her experience, from working on the 9/11 response task force to being stationed in Baghdad to working on the humanitarian crisis in Darfur.

“Sanford said she always had an interest in public service, but she never imagined a career so rich, diverse and challenging.”

If you are interested in a career in the federal government, read this profile, and explore the information on the Partnership website as well as the PSLawNet Federal Government Resources. Legal hiring is one of the top five areas where the federal government is going to be hiring in the next few years, and the breadth and depth of opportunity in a federal career is worth exploring.

Stay informed with PSLawNet’s weekly aggregation of public interest news stories from around the country.

• 1.8.10 – Albany Times-Union – Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, New York’s highest-ranking jurist, testified in front of the state legislature about the dire need for increased legal services funding.  While the state court system has already, in an unprecedented move, allocated $15 million to shore up funding, Lippman highlighted dramatic shortfalls in IOLA funding and noted that “[w]e cannot and will not stand idly by as legal services programs are forced to shut their doors, leaving our most vulnerable citizens without help in their time of greatest need.”  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: Additionally, the North Country Gazette reports that Jonathan E. Gradess, executive director of the New York State Defenders Association, expressed support at the hearings for bolstering civil legal services funding.  Interestingly, Gradess “also pointed out that calls for a ‘civil Gideon’…would be a ‘pyrrhic victory’ if modeled on the current implementation of…Gideon v. Wainwright.”  This likely reflects the view by many in the indigent defense community that Gideon’s promise has not been achieved because public defense programs are inadequately staffed and under-resourced.]

• 1.8.10 – Arizona Daily Star – in the wake of the Tucson City Council’s decision to slash the city budget by $25 million, the city prosecutor will lay off 3 of her office’s 38 attorneys.  The layoffs “will force the elimination of the Mental Health Court, a highly touted program devoted to keeping mentally ill people out of jail…[and] the elimination of the neighborhood prosecution team, which handles…neighborhood nuisance issues.”  The courthouse administrators and public defender’s office avoided layoffs.  Link to article.

• 1.5.10 – Daytona Beach News-Journal – Equal Justice Works Fellow Shelly Campbell is working to ensure that veterans who face substance abuse problems, homelessness, and psychological disorders are able to access the full range of benefits to which they are entitled.  Link to article.

After the jump, read about legal services funding initiatives, a call from two state’s chief judges to allow limited-scope representation of low-income clients, a re-entry program for recently released federal inmates, and more.

Many law students take on extraordinary amounts of educational debt to finance increasingly expensive legal educations.  But those students on public-service career paths in particular must confront the fact that the primary tool they’ll have to dig out of debt – their salary – seems alarmingly insufficient to the task.

The Problem:

The recently released Law School Survey of Student Engagement (LSSSE) report (which provides some fascinating insights into an array of issues affecting law students) tells us:

“The percentage of full-time U.S. students expecting to graduate owing more than $120,000 is up notably in 2009 from prior years. In 2006, 2007, and 2008, the percentage of students expecting to owe more than $120,000 at graduation rose gradually each year. For example in 2006, 18% of students fell into this category. In 2007 the percentage rose to 19%, and 23% in 2008. This past year saw a 6% increase; in 2009, 29% of students expect to graduate with this level of debt.”

Cliff’s Notes Version: Just about 3 in 10 full-time students expect to leave law school with over $120,000 in debt.  Further, according the the LSSSE report, the percentage of such students is rising more rapidly among students at public law schools.

This makes sense in light of ABA data on law school tuitions, which show that public school tuitions have risen at a much faster clip than private school tuitions.  In 1987, the median tuition for a state resident at a state law school was $2124.  In 2007, it was $14,313.  Correspondingly, the 1987 median tuition figure at a private school was $8690.  In 2007, it was $32,168.  The private school tuition attracts most folks’ attention because of its sticker-shock effect.  But it is the public school tuition figure that, while lower in dollar value,  has risen much more quickly.  And alarmingly so.  Between 1987 and 2007, in-state median tuition at state schools skyrocketed by 573% compared with the 270% increase on the private-school side.  Traditionally, state schools have been highly attractive options for students on public-service career paths because of the relatively low cost of tuition.  To be sure, tuition is still lower in state schools, but relatively speaking state schools are not the bargains they used to be.  (And remember, these are median figures; by definition half of the schools in the measurement pool have tuitions higher than the median.)

Of course another problem deals with salaries offered in public-service positions.  NALP’s 2008 Public Sector & Public Interest Attorney Salary Report (we’ll release an updated version of the report later this year) paints a…let’s say “realistic”…picture.  The national, median starting salary for civil legal services lawyers was $40,000.  For local prosecutors, it was $45,675.

This combination of a high, anticipated debt load and relatively low salary leaves even those students who are most committed to public service to wonder if the reward is worth the sacrifice.

The Solutions  

1. Become financially literate.  It was easy to sign that promissory note before your 1L year, wasn’t it?  Be honest: did you read the fine print?  (Your author, who is a former legal services lawyer and who knows what it is like to struggle with student debt, did not read the fine print.  He does not think he is alone.) If you do not have a firm grasp on the nature of your borrowing, now is the time to learn.  Make an appointment with your financial aid office.  Call your lender.  Check out the self-help, educational materials offered by the Project on Student Debt.  Knowing exactly how much you’ve borrowed, what kinds of loans you have, and how interest will accrue on the principals is a key to managing your debt.  If you ignore it, it will grow more quickly than if you pay attention to it.
2. Keep borrowing to a minimum while you are in school.  Cutting out $1000 here and there as you apply for loan disbursements is very, very meaningful in the long run.  Be mindful of the “bar loans,” too, which are typically made available by private lenders to folks who need to supplement their incomes during the bar-exam prep period.  Many 3Ls take this approach: “Well, I’ve already borrowed $80,000.  What’s another $10,000?”  The answer: it’s another $10,000.  Interest will accumulate on it.  Private loans may not be as easy to manage as federal government loans either, and the interest rate is likely to be higher.
3. Get to know about Loan Repayment Assistance Programs (LRAPs).  LRAPs can be God-sends for newly minted public service lawyers who are scraping by on low salaries.  For many grads they are the difference between being able to pursue their career goals and, well, not being able.  Learn more about LRAPs on PSLawNet’s Financing a Public Interest Career page. 
4. Become familiar with the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007.  Heard of the CCRAA?  This federal legislation 1) created a new repayment option for qualifying public service lawyers – called Income Based Repayment (IBR), and 2) established a loan forgiveness program which will forgive eligible educational debt after a 120-month (10-year) period of repayment.  These programs are designed to work so that, after paying via IBR for period of time, a public service lawyer may be eligible to to have the rest of their eligible loans forgiven.  The CCRAA could have a huge impact in the public interest community – significantly lightening the load for debt-laden public interest attorneys and leading to a forgiveness of eligible debt altogether.
5. Take advantage of Equal Justice Works’ resources.  No organization has done more work on student-debt issues for public service lawyers than Equal Justice Works. Visit their Student Debt Relief page, and you’ll find links to educational resources on the CCRAA, details on various LRAP programs, FAQ’s, archived student-debt webinars led by a national expert on the issue, and more. 

In Summary…

A weighty student debt load can be a formidable obstacle for a student or recent grad on a public service career path.  It must be taken seriously, and each student/grad should “take ownership” of their borrowing by becoming as well informed as possible about its consequences.  While daunting, the student-debt obstacle need not be insurmountable.  Wise, fully-informed borrowing decisions, the aquisition of knowledge about how to manage debt, some perseverance, and some common sense may make all the difference in pursuing a unique and rewarding public service career.  Good luck!

– Steve Grumm