In a Fort Worth Star- Telegram op-ed several days ago, the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Texas and the chair of the Texas Access to Justice Commission noted that more and more low-income Texans are representing themselves in civil matters for which they can not afford counsel, which runs the risk of clogging up the court system.  The authors contended that while the longer-term solution to this problem is to adequately fund civil legal services programs, in the short term courts, public interest organizations, and other stakeholders should implement programs and resources to help pro se litigants navigate the justice system.

Because there is no adequate system in place to assist self-represented citizens seeking access to the courts, confusion and frustration reign for the litigant, the courts and court personnel. The Constitution assures that poor criminal defendants have counsel, but indigent civil litigants who face serious and life-altering disputes are not similarly protected.

 

…

 

We will continue aspiring to the ideal that all litigants should be represented by competent counsel. In the meantime, these innovative programs can serve as models for Texas as we strive to address the challenge to give all of our citizens the tools to protect their legal rights.

This week, the Texas Tribune focuses on the growing problem…

The vast majority [of pro se litigants in Dallas] have little knowledge of the law or interest in navigating their case through the complex legal system. They simply can’t afford a lawyer, and Legal Aid in Texas only serves those who earn up to a mere 125 percent above the poverty line.

Last week, the Tribune notes, the Texas Forum on Self-Represented Litigants and the Courts took place in Dallas.  Participants highlighted the fact that the terrible state of funding for civil legal services programs is closely tied to the problem of swelling numbers of pro se litigants, some of whom would qualify for legal aid but are turned away because of overwhelming caseloads.

‘Legal aid is able to help two out of seven to eight people who need it — if that,’ says Jonathan Vickery of Texas Access to Justice Foundation, and in most cases what they get is limited to a little advice, not true representation.  ‘So what are people to do when they are facing loss of their children, eviction from their home, where do they go?’

In 2007, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching released Educating Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law.  (The report press release is freely available, as well as the executive summary (pdf)). The report found that while law schools do an excellent job of training students to “think like a lawyer,” they pretty uniformly struggle to provide “strong skill[s] in serving clients and a solid ethical grounding.” The Report made seven recommendations to integrate practical skills and ethical training with doctrinal education, and called for an

“integrated, three-part curriculum: (1) the teaching of legal doctrine and analysis, which provides the basis for professional growth; (2) introduction to the several facets of practice included under the rubric of lawyering, leading to acting with responsibility for clients; and (3) exploration and assumption of the identity, values and dispositions consonant with the fundamental purposes of the legal profession.”

Remember, this was all in 2007, before the economic collapse and ongoing restructuring of the legal profession. The recommendations are taking on more weight these days though, and were discussed as part of a conference this weekend on potential new models for legal education. The National Law Journal reported on the conference and both old and new suggestions, writing,

“The deficiencies cited in the Carnegie report have only been exacerbated by the downturn in the legal economy, which has slowed law firm hiring and prompted some clients to revolt against paying for the on-the-job training of first- and second-year associates.”

So it may be that where law schools were unwilling to make drastic changes for the sake of improving an educational system, they may be forced to make them to ensure their graduates are viable hires in this economy. The speakers at the conference certainly pulled no punches when discussing the current state of legal education. Paul Lippe, CEO of Legal OnRamp, said

“Law school is not simply incomplete, it’s directionally wrong in many respects because it’s misaligned with where the world really is. In my opinion, most of the things I see that are problematic in the profession right now are rooted in law schools.”

The conference is part of a year-long series focusing on changes in legal education sponsored by Harvard Law School and New York Law School, and we will strive to keep you updated on all the news coming out (a follow-up meeting is scheduled for October, with final recommendations and plans scheduled to be released in April 2011). It will be particularly interesting to watch if or how reformers discuss legal education in relation to public interest and public service work.

• 4.8.10 – Casper Star-Tribune (Wyoming) – the Wyoming legislature just passed a bill to create a statewide legal services program.   Before this became a reality, though, Legal Aid of Wyoming had been leveraging its limited resources to provide access to justice for low-income Wyomingites.  The organization can help only about 10% of those who apply for services.  Link to article.

• 4.8.10 – The Town Talk (Central Louisiana) – Louisiana State Bar Association members are advocating that the legislature restore state funding to civil legal services programs that operate throughout the state.  Attorneys in the legal services community point out that while demand for services is rising, resource cuts are limiting the amount of help they can offer.  Link to article.

• 4.7.10 – Legal Services Corporation Press Release – “Six presidential appointees to the Legal Services Corporation’s Board of Directors were sworn in to office this morning and at their inaugural Board meeting elected John G. Levi, a partner in the Chicago office of Sidley Austin, as Board chairman and Martha Minow, dean of the Harvard Law School, as vice chair.”  Link to press release.

• 4.7.10 – Baltimore Sun – “Annapolis lawmakers will not withhold any funds from the University of Maryland’s law clinic for pursuing an unpopular environmental lawsuit, quieting a debate about academic freedom that raged in the state legislature last week.  The decision reverses an earlier position taken by senators and House Appropriations members who initially were outraged that the law students named a small Eastern Shore farmer in an environmental lawsuit that targeted poultry giant Perdue.”  Lawmakers, who must reconcile the final language in the state’s budget bill, are still requesting that the clinical program turn over some information about its activities, but this disclosure will likely no longer be tied to a threat to withhold funding.  The PSLawNet Blog has covered this story extensively, with links to additional media coverage from the Sun and other outlets.

• 4.7.10 – University of Virginia School of Law Website – “Law School graduates who choose careers in public service will soon be able to take advantage of a more generous loan forgiveness program, the Law School announced Wednesday.  Under the new Virginia Loan Forgiveness Program (VLFP II), graduates who take public service jobs that pay less than $75,000 per year will be eligible for loan assistance. The new program will cover the entire annual loan payments for graduates who make $55,000 or less.”    Link to announcement on website.  [Ed. Note: the loan forgiveness program has essentially been redesigned so that it works in tandem with the Income Based Repayment provision of the federal College Cost Reduction and Access Act.  The University of Virginia joins the Georgetown University Law Center and the University of California Berkeley School of Law in “dovetailing” their loan repayment/forgiveness program with the CCRAA.]

• 4.5.10 – San Jose Mercury News (California) – in Santa Clara County, public defenders have just begun staffing misdemeanor arraignment proceedings to “help defendants deal with…potentially serious criminal charges.”  Up until now, “neither public defenders [n]or prosecutors have regularly staffed misdemeanor arraignments, a defendant’s first court appearance. Defendants charged with misdemeanors were arraigned before a judge who often offered a plea deal to quickly resolve the case. Many legal experts consider that a potential violation of the defendants’ constitutional right to counsel. Some believe that defendants plead guilty simply to get out of jail.”    Link to article.   

• 4.5.10 – New Jersey Law Journal – The Seton Hall University School of Law’s loan repayment assistance program (LRAP) is not currently available to prosecutors.  Two alumni, both of whom work as county prosecutors in New Jersey, are spearheading an initiative to change that.  They have garnered support from other alumni and attorneys via an online petition and a Facebook group page.  The law school is “not unreceptive” to the idea of expanding the program to include prosecutors.  One school official noted that, at the time the LRAP was created in 2002, there was a sense that low salaries were not as much an impediment to law grads choosing careers as prosecutors relative to some other, low-paying public service jobs.  Link to article.

• 4.4.10 – Chicago Tribune – about 60 Class-of-2009 law graduates whose start dates were deferred by big law firms have joined Chicago’s  legal services community during their deferral periods.  Despite some initial skepticism about how effective these temporary placements would be, they have worked out remarkably well so far, with the deferred associates getting valuable hands-on practice experience while helping organizations to maintain service capacity.  Link to PSLawNet Blog post and Tribune article. 

• 4.4.10 – Toledo Blade (Ohio) – in Lucas County, Ohio, Advocates for Basic Legal Equality (ABLE) is among a group of nonprofit organizations administering the “Mobile Benefit Bank,” which seeks to engage clients who need help applying for government benefits by making house-calls and attending community events rather than requiring clients to come to the organizations’ offices or to navigate government application processes on their own.  Five AmeriCorps volunteers, armed with laptops and portable printers, staff the project by meeting clients at locales throughout the county.  Link to article. 

• 4.2.10 – National Law Journal – on the heels of a huge staff layoff at the Los Angeles County Superior Court, the court’s presiding judge is locking horns with the Administrative Office of the Courts, which funds state courts, about how severe the Superior Court’s financial problems are.  “A recent report playing down the fiscal crisis at Los Angeles County, Calif., Superior Court was based on ‘unfounded optimism’ and ‘erroneous’ calculations, Presiding Judge Charles ‘Tim’ McCoy wrote in a March 31 letter to the Judicial Council of California, which oversees the state’s courts.  The letter came two days after the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), the Judicial Council funding arm for the state’s courts, released a report contending that an anticipated layoff of 500 employees later this year at the Los Angeles Superior Court was based on ‘overly pessimistic’ assumptions about the court’s budget scenario.”  Link to article.

• 4.1.10 – Fort Worth Star-Telegram (Op-Ed) – more and more low-income Texans are representing themselves in civil matters for which they can not afford counsel, which runs the risk of clogging up the court system.  While the longer-term solution to this problem is to adequately fund civil legal services programs, in the short term courts, public interest organizations, and other stakeholders should implement programs and resources to help pro se litigants navigate the justice system.   Link to op-ed. 

Yesterday, the Tribune ran a piece on the ~60 deferred associates who have taken placements of varying lengths in the Chicago public-interest community.  This phenomenon has played out in Chicago quite the same way that it’s played out in other large legal markets throughout the country.  Biglaw was “sitting with an oversupply and were forced to lay off hundreds and postpone the starting dates of law school graduates they had hired to begin in the fall of 2009.”  At the same time, the nonprofit, public-interest law offices were weathering their own financial storms, with caseloads swelling as funding depleted.

The opposite ends of Chicago’s legal profession found a way to come together out of economic necessity to partially consume the supply of highly educated young lawyers looking for work. Despite several challenges, the unusual experiment has paid dividends. It also has sparked discussions of whether a more permanent model of apprenticeships can be developed that would train law-school graduates at a lower cost and benefit public-interest legal organizations that are suffering from funding constraints while attending to a greater need because of the recession.

The piece, which looks specifically at how the placements have played out at Cabrini Green Legal Aid, Chicago Volunteer Legal Services, and Equip for Equality, notes that there was initial skepticism in the public interest community about how effective these placements would be.  Nonetheless, they have worked out remarkably well so far, with the deferred associates getting valuable hands-on practice experience while helping organizations to maintain service capacity. 

Sarah Song, an associate whose start date was deferred by Latham and Watkins, has made the most of her experience:

Song is working in the housing law division, which helps tenants, many of whom live in public housing or receive government subsidies, who are being evicted. She sent her resume to several groups and was hired by CGLA because she had prior experience in housing through summer internships and clinical work in law school, Acton said.

When asked what she has learned, Song said, “Where do I start? I’ve learned about courtroom etiquette and professionalism. I’m also working with clients on a daily basis. You learn to navigate relationships with different personalities and needs. I’ve also learned a lot about housing law.”

Most first-year associates never see the inside of a courtroom, let alone have daily client interaction.

Song added: “The experience has prepared me for my future.”

***

The situation as reported in this story is in keeping with the picture painted during a focus-group meeting of Chicago-based deferred associates that NALP had convened in late January, in partnership with the Chicago Bar Foundation and the Public Interest Law Initiative.  The tone of that discussion was quite positive, with several focus-group participants highlighting the opportunities they had to immediately use their advocacy skills in court, to cultivate problem-solving skills, and to interact with clients.  And in conversations with directors at public interest host organizations which were hosting the associates, we learned that their contributions to serving clients during a lean fiscal time were invaluable.

It is good to see that this very strange set of circumstances, which would have been inconceivable two years ago, has resulted in more clients being served and in a bond forming between the deferred associates and their public-interest host organizations which may lead to continued collaborations for years to come.  The PSLawNet Blog still has some concerns about how the deferral phenomenon may affect students who are pursuing careers in public interest work.  These students are emerging from law school at a time when many of the employers they’d like to work for don’t have funding to hire them.  And in some sense, it seems unfair that they are now also competing with deferred associates who do not need salaries from their public interest host organizations.  Notwithstanding, having extra advocates to serve low-income clients – who have been hit harder than anybody during the recession – is, in the short term, a very positive development for the public interest community as a whole.

The Public Interest News Bulletin took a rare vacation last week, but has returned with coverage of stories from the past two weeks affecting public interest lawyers and law students.

• 4.1.10 – Atlanta Journal-Constitution – rural Georgians find it difficult to access legal services because so few lawyers practice outside of the state’s metropolitan areas.  Of 28,200 lawyers practicing in the state, almost 70% are in the greater Atlanta area.  There are 35 counties with no more than four lawyers.  The Georgia Legal Services Program, which aims to serve low-income clients outside of Atlanta, is seeing demand for its services rise, but its funding streams have diminished in the recession.  (IOLTA funding to GLSP was cut in half between 2009 and 2010 – from $2.8 million to $1.4 million.)  To further compound the problem of accessing legal services in rural areas, moderate-income Georgians who do not qualify for free legal services often end up representing themselves because they find it too expensive to retain counsel.  Link to article.

• 3.31.10 – Blog of the Legal Times – “In a case [Robertson v. United States ex rel Watson] being closely watched by advocates for domestic abuse victims, several Supreme Court justices on Wednesday expressed serious discomfort with a District of Columbia law that lets the victims themselves bring criminal prosecutions to enforce restraining orders.”  The underlying question in Robertson is whether a private individual who initiates a criminal contempt proceeding is acting as a state agent in doing so.  While many advocates for DV victims support allowing individuals to pursue such actions (because they can be initiated by battered women who seek to enforce restraining orders), “at least four justices wondered aloud about the protections afforded to criminal defendants facing such charges” because it is tantamount to giving law enforcement authority to private citizens.  Link to blog post. 

• 3.29.10 – National Law Journal (Opinion Piece) – recent lawsuits challenging resource deficiencies in state indigent defense programs, as well as a well-intentioned Department of Justice initiative to shore up public defense infrastructures nationwide, show that there is a problem.  But the federal government should not “throw more money at the states; instead, it needs to get out of this business altogether….  The problem is entirely of the state’s own making and within its control. State lawmakers determine what will be a crime in the first place and the attached punishment, while state agents choose which individuals will be propelled through the criminal justice system.”  And when states exercise their power to create and enforce criminal laws, they must also ensure that their justice systems provide adequate resources for the accused to protect their rights.  “[D]elinquent jurisdictions must be held responsible for their decisions, not absolved from their constitutional debts. The states owe indigent defendants competent legal representation. It’s time to pay up.”  Link to piece.

• 3.29.10 – New York RealEstateRama Website – New York City “Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg…launched a new NYC Service initiative to provide free legal support for New Yorkers at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure.  The program will increase the availability and effectiveness of free legal representation for those facing foreclosure by training and dispatching 300 volunteer attorneys to expand legal services provided by non-profit organizations.”  The volunteers’ work will be supported by ProBono.net, the Empire Justice Center, Legal Services NYC, the Legal Aid Society, and the City Bar Justice Center.  Link to article.

• 3.29.10 – The Recorder (California) – San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, during a press conference on 3/25, called for the city to establish a crime lab that works independently of law enforcement “in the wake of an evidence tampering scandal at the police department’s crime lab.”  Also, in calling for additional dismissals of cases [the prosecutor’s office has already dismissed over 350 drug cases] that could have been tainted as a result of the scandal, Adachi argued that the prosecutor has been slow to turn over information related to the scandal.  The District Attorney’s office opposes a sweeping round of case dismissals and contends that it is not responding slowly to requests for information.  Link to article.      

• 3.26.10 – Idaho Mountain Express – a report released in January by the National Legal Aid & Defender Association “states that Idaho has ‘sewn a patchwork quilt’ of underfunded and overworked public defender systems that are not constitutionally adequate.”   The report reviewed varying public defense models used in several counties.  The Idaho Criminal Justice Commisssion, which had been studying the indigent defense infrastructure in the state even before the report’s release, is now reviewing the report and is developing “a model public defender system for use by counties, public defender conduct standards, guidelines for qualifications for appointment of public defenders…and training programs for judges and lawyers.”  Link to article.

• 3.26.10 – Charlotte Observer (North Carolina) – an assistant public defender in Mecklenburg County is “taking steps to limit court participation by the neighborhood advocacy group called CharMeck Court Watch.”  The group’s goal is to push for “tougher penalties for some defendants with histories of arrests or convictions for felonies.”  The assistant public defender opposes the group’s practice of handing up written materials to prosecutors during court proceedings, and also worries that members wearing Court Watch t-shirts in the courtroom may have a prejudicial effect on proceedings.   (As to the practice wearing t-shirts, an ACLU attorney suggests that there is no problem with this as long as Court Watch members do not interfere with proceedings.)  Link to article.

• 3.25.10 – Blog of the Legal Times – the District of Columbia is to become a mandatory IOLTA jurisdiction.  See coverage, including a link to the original BLT post, in the PSLawNet Blog .

• 3.25.10 – Atlanta Journal-Constitution – “The Georgia Supreme Court on Thursday narrowly rejected a bid to bar prosecutors from seeking the death penalty against a defendant who has sat in jail for more than three years awaiting trial because there has been no money for his defense.  The 4-3 ruling said the state did not violate Jamie Ryan Weis’ right to a speedy trial and placed some of the blame on the defendant and his attorneys.”  Link to article.  [Ed. Note – Georgia’s underfunded public defense system has recevied a good deal of coverage lately.  The Georgia Supreme Court heard arguments in a case very similar to this one earlier this month, according to another Atlanta Journal-Constitution article.  And, the Associated Press recently covered the sad financial state of the system.]

• 3.24.10 – Buffalo Law Joural (New York) (Running an Associated Press story) –  “An attorney for the New York Civil Liberties Union told the state’s top court Tuesday that poor defendants often spend much more time locked up because the state system of public defenders routinely fails.   The NYCLU claims that the lack of effective legal help violates state and federal constitutional guarantees to counsel. The group faulted all three methods used among the state’s 62 counties: full-time public defenders, a list of private lawyers who take cases and legal-aid societies.”  The NYCLU is fighting the keep the lawsuit alive.  It was dismissed by a lower court over concerns that the judiciary may intrude upon legislative functions if it fashions a means to change the indigent defense system.  Link to story.

• 3.23.10 – OMB Watch Website (Commentary Piece) – “For the past 14 years, the Legal Services Corporation (LSC), which funds legal services for the poor, has been forced by Congress to place severe restrictions on legal aid programs that receive LSC funds….  At this critical time in our nation, legislative support for the Civil Access to Justice Act of 2009 is crucial….  The…act would expand access to justice to low-income populations by lifting … restrictions and helping to ensure that federally funded legal services providers are able to assist their clients in the most effective way possible.”  [Ed. Note: the piece provides a useful history of attempts, through litigation, to roll back the operating restrictions placed on LSC grantees in the late 1990s.]  Link to piece.

• 3.22.10 – Pittsburgh Tribune-Review – “Federal judges have been giving black and Hispanic males longer sentences as compared to white males since a 2005 Supreme Court decision converted federal sentencing guidelines from mandates to suggestions, a recently released U.S. Sentencing Commission report says.  Local criminal defense attorneys and law professors said they’re skeptical about the study’s results and don’t want to see a return to mandatory guidelines.”  The 2005 Supreme Court decision held that the mandatory sentencing guidelines in place at the time must instead be read by judges as recommendations.  Since then, according to the USSC report, disparities in sentences for minority defendants compared to whites have returned, whereas they were actually abating at the time of the Supreme Court decision.  Critics of the report note that some data which was not factored into its analysis may have skewed the disparity figures.  The “data do not meausure the amount of violence in the defendant’s criminal past, or crimes included in the pre-sentencing report that aren’t used to calculate teh defendant’s criminal history score.”  Link to article.

• 3.22.10 – Connecticut Law Tribune – as legal services programs in Connecticut have fallen victim to budget woes, the state’s chapter of the American College of Trial Lawyers put on a free one-day, litigation skills training for legal services lawyers.  Link to article.

• 3.20.10 – Lansing State Journal (Michigan) (Running an Associated Press Story) – Michigan “has one of the nation’s stingiest and most fragmented systems for representing the 80 percent of defendants who can’t afford a lawyer, a wide range of critics say.”  A National Legal Aid & Defender Association report noted that the state’s annual per capita spending on indigent defense, $7.35, ranks it among the lowest of the 50 states.  Some also point to the fact that having an inadequate public defense system could ultimately cost the state money in having to adjudicate ineffective-asssitance-of-counsel appeals and in housing a larger number of inmates.  There are reform efforts being pushed in both the legislative and judicial arenas.  “The state House Judiciary Committee is drafting a bipartisan proposal to overhaul Michigan’s 153-year-old indigent defense system.”  And, next month the state supreme court will hear arguments in a class action suit, initiated by the ACLU, challenging the system as being inadequate to meet constitutional guarantees.  Link to article.  [Ed Note: a previous PSLawNet Blog post on the Michigan indigent defense crisis links to additional media coverage.]

• 3.20.10 – Marin Independent Journal (California) – in a circumstance emblematic of difficult decisions confronting cash-strapped counties throughout the U.S., Marin Mediations Services, a Marin County program that has “resolved thousands of disputes…over the past three decades” may not survive as the government wrestles with a $20 million budget shortfall.  The program will not go away without a fight from its director, who argues that mediation services save money by settling legal disputes without protracted litigation.”  If the program is cut, the county may ask the district attorney’s office to handle more mediation matters.  Link to article.

• 3.19.10 – New York Times – the Santa Clara County (California) district attorney’s recently imposed policy of using peremptory challenges to effectively ban a particular judge from sitting in most criminal matters has caused debate in the legal community and led to complications in courthouse administration.  District Attorney Dolores Carr contends that Judge Andrea Bryan is not giving her office a “fair shake.”  Since Bryan threw out a sexual abuse conviction because of what she saw as “outrageous” misconduct on the part of a prosecutor at trial, Carr’s office has instituted the peremptory challange policy.  Such challenges are permitted by law  but the sheer volume and consistency of the challenges is a marked departure from custom.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: previous coverage available via stories from the San Jose Mercury News published on  2.8.10 and 1.26.10.] 

• 3.19.10 – Legal Services Corporation Press Release – the Senate confirmed six of President Obama’s nominees to serve on the board of the Legal Services Corporation.  “The six nominees were Sharon L. Browne, Robert J. Grey, Jr., Charles N.W. Keckler, John G. Levi, Victor B. Maddox and Martha L. Minow. President Obama announced their nominations last year and the nominations were approved by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, led by Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Ranking Member Michael B. Enzi (R-Wyo.).”  Link to press release.  [Ed. Note – one nomination, that of Sharon L. Browne, had caused some controversy in the public interest community as both the ABA and a sizeable consortium of public interest advocates opposed her joining the LSC board.  The PSLawNet Blog covered this controversy in 3/11 post.]

• 3.18.10 – Casper Journal (Wyoming) – on March 11 Wyoming’s governor signed into law a bill that begins to build the infrastructure for a statewide civil legal services sytem.  “In 2009, Wyoming and Idaho were the only two states in the nation that didn’t have a specific appropriation to directly support general, civil legal aid for low income individuals. The law that goes into effect on July 1 will put Wyoming in line with the rest of the nation by providing legal services statewide for the tens of thousands of Wyoming people who can’t afford the legal services they need.”  The legal services program will be funded via a $10 court case filing fee, which will be collected beginning in July.  By November, a plan to put the accumulated funds into action should be submitted to the Wyoming legislature.  Link to article.

Jonathan Smith of the Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia wrote yesterday on their blog a response to an op-ed by Gillian Hadfield arguing that expanding non-lawyer legal help may be the necessary missing piece in ensuring that everyone has (more) equitable access to the justice system. Smith disagrees with Hadfield’s proposal, and argues quite eloquently as to the need for lawyers rather than just improving self-help options.

In an interesting article that underscores the importance of this debate, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran an article today on the lack of lawyers in the rural parts of the state. Georgia actually faces no shortage of attorneys, but 70% of them serve in the Atlanta metro area, leaving the rest of the state severely underserved, particularly as demands for free or low-cost legal services rise. If non-lawyer legal help isn’t the answer, then there must be a discussion on how to get the lawyers we have to serve the currently underserved (of course, that conversation is happening, as in the efforts to ensure a civil right to counsel which we have blogged about in the past).

last month, Seattle University School of Law, University of Washington School of Law, and Gonzaga University School of Law co-hosted a symposium on civil legal representation and access to justice issues. If you couldn’t make it to Seattle for the symposium, never fear – the materials are now available online, and provide some great information.  Additionally, we’ve blogged here about the rise of Access to Justice commissions as well as the “civil Gideon” movement. And if you still want more reading material, check out the National Coalition for the Civil Right to Counsel – they have a resource page with links to articles, state statutes, research, news, and more.

• 3/18/10 – State Bar of Wisconsin Website – “In a move supported by the State Bar of Wisconsin, the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee has approved releasing an additional $1.4 million to support prosecutors around the state in an effort to ease the increased workload caused by a new law increasing penalties for driving while intoxicated.  However, the committee on March 16 also passed on three opportunities to allocate even more support to already-strained district attorney offices in Wisconsin.”  Link to article.

• 3/18/10 – Columbia Missourian (Op-ed) – as a litany of studies and reports have demonstrated, the indigent defense network in Missouri is laboring under the weight of too many cases with too few resources.  The 6th Amendment guarantee of a right to counsel that was recognized in Gideon v. Wainwright could be in jeopardy.  “At some point, justice underfunded is justice denied.”  In the current legislative climate, the problem will not likely be solved with a windfall of needed funding, though.  So, it may be necessary to take administrative steps that increase public defenders’ political clout and broaden their base of political support, giving them a stronger voice when they seek additional resources for their programs.  Link to op-ed.

• 3/18/10 – San Francisco Chronicle – “A Senate committee approved the nominations of Sharon Browne and two other Republicans to the board of Legal Services Corp. last week on a voice vote with no dissent.  Ms. Browne’s nomination had been opposed by several civil rights and public interest organizations, which argued that some of her work and the work of her employer, the Pacific Legal Foundation, essentially undermined the mission of the legal services community.  However, “In written answers to questions from Democrats on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, Browne said she supports federal legal aid to the poor. She disavowed some of her foundation’s positions, including a lawsuit that unsuccessfully challenged one of the major sources of legal aid funding.”  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: the PSLawNet Blog has additional coverage of  the Senate committee vote here.]

• 3/18/10 – Press Release – “The New York Bar Foundation announced today that it has recently awarded 57 grants totaling $337,050 to fund charitable and educational law-related projects. The grants have been awarded to legal services agencies, bar associations and other nonprofit organizations to fund projects throughout New York State. Several grants will support programs that provide access to justice to those who suffer from domestic violence, to low-income or poor immigrants, to the elderly who are neglected or abused, and to incarcerated women. Portions of grant funding will help those seeking assistance with legal guardianships for disabled children, bankruptcy, foreclosures, debt collection, and consumer debt.”  Link to press release.

• 3/18/10 – Baltimore Sun “Maryland Politics” Blog – Maryland’s House of Delegates passed a measure that would increase funding for financially beleaguered legal services programs through an increase in court filing fees.  However, the language in the House’s bill differs from a measure recently approved by the Senate, and the two must be reconciled before April 12th, when the legislative session ends.  Link to article.  [Ed. Note: earlier this week a Washington Post editorial urged Maryland lawmakers to pass legislation that would boost funding for legal services providers throughout the state.  Shoring up funding for legal services is essential, the editorial argued, because the IOLTA funding mechanism in the state has been all but crippled during the recession; IOLTA yields fell from $6.7 million just 18 months ago to $2 million presently.  Link to editorial.]

• 3/18/10 – New York Law Journal – “The New York City Bar yesterday retracted a finding from a survey suggesting that deferred associates were not satisfied with the lawyers with whom they worked at public interest groups. The city bar said it misinterpreted data it collected earlier this year.”  The City Bar attributed the mistake in interpreting the initial finding to a confusing presentation of the survey data.  A revised version of the survey report is now available.  In contrast to the initial report, the revised report shows that “deferred associates ‘were largely happy with their placements,’ a stark difference from the previous report, which suggested a “culture gap” had emerged between the law firm-bound lawyers and their public interest colleagues.”  Link to article.  Link to revised report.  

• 3/16/10 – Washington Post (Letter to the Editor) – Scott Wallace, now a foundation chair and formerly the director of defender services for the Nat’l Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA) writes in praise of a recent Washington Post editorial, which itself was supportive of Attorney General Holder’s initiative to shore up indigent defense services throughout the country.  Wallace argues that the editorial did not go far enough, though, and that DOJ should pressure states to make sure that their public defense infrastructures do in fact meet constitutional obligations.  Link to letter. 

• 3/16/10 – National Law Journal –  “The Los Angeles County, Calif., Superior Court will lay off 329 employees and close 17 courtrooms in response to cuts tied to California’s continuing budget crisis, administrators announced on Tuesday.”  There is some controversy surrounding the move; the Judicial Council of California, “which oversees court funding” throughout the state, expressed skepticism that this move by local court officials was necessary.  However, L.A. Superior Court Presiding Judge Tim McCoy, Jr. hinted that even more layoffs could be necessary to stem a budget deficit that could run to $140 million in the next four years.   Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – New York Times – as U.S. military veterans return from combat deployments, a significant percentage is at risk of suffering from mental health problems.  Civilian courts across the country take veterans’ service and potential readjustment issues into account when they run into trouble with the law.  “Judges have recognized that many of those returning from war are carrying a heavy burden of damage that might not be physically visible.”  Several states have been seeing more veterans in courts, and in order to ensure that they receive the treatment they are due have been establishing special courts, akin to drug courts, that allow the judicial system to take into account the unique circumstances that affect veterans’ behavior.  Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – The Daily Tell – “two $1 million grants to the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University will establish the Diane Halle Center for Family Justice and the NextCare Urgent Care Family Violence Legal Clinic to address domestic law issues….  Together, these two new organizations will engage law students [on issues related to] child abuse, spousal abuse, family law, juvenile law, protective orders and more. It is hoped that the programs will not only benefit victims but also educate future generations of lawyers about the importance of serving family clients.”  Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – New York Times – “A class-action suit to be argued next week in New York’s highest court has become a test of a national strategy by civil liberties groups to challenge what they say are failed public defender programs in many states.  Because an estimated 80 percent of felony defendants in large states are too poor to hire their own lawyers, and because the case is being watched around the nation, the case has the potential to alter the shape of the criminal justice system.”  In the suit, the New York Civil Liberties Union is challenging the constitutionality of the statewide indigent defense infrastructure in the Empire State.  The Court of Appeals will decide whether the suit can go forward in a lower trial court.  The state has argued that the judiciary should not be involved in re-fashioning the indigent defense system through a court decision because it is the responsibility of the other two branches of government.  Link to article.

• 3/15/10 – Cincinnati Enquirer – The Legal Aid Society of Greater Cincinnati has a launched the “Covering Kids and Families” campaign, which “aims to enroll 1,800 eligible children and teens in nine Southwest Ohio counties, including Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren counties, in Medicaid. There are an estimated 18,000 uninsured children and teens in the nine-county area.”  Campaign efforts will concentrate on outreach to underserved communities.  The initiative coincides with a similar undertaking by the state government to insure children who are eligible for health coverage but are not enrolled.  Link to article.

• 3.14.10 – Minneapolis Star Tribune – Galen Robinson, an attorney with Mid-Minnesota Legal Assistance, is used to helping low-income clients with matters that may not garner much media attention.  Now, though, the spotlight has found Robinson as he and team of colleagues wage a legal battle against Governor Tim Pawlenty over his budget-cutting move that would defund a nutrition program used by low-income Minnesotans.  Link to article. 

• 3/12/10 – Los Angeles Times – a medical-legal partnership serving low-income residents in the Los Angeles area is one of 10 such programs in California and 76 partnerships nationwide.  Often, poor people will seek medical attention for health problems but will not realize that they also have underlying legal problems or that they may be able to use the justice system to improve their living conditions – and their health – by addressing poor housing conditions, accessing public benefits, and in other ways.  Medical-legal partnerships allow doctors and lawyers to take more broad-based approaches to improving their patients’/clients’ lives.  Link to article.

PSLawNet is in the business of helping public-service minded law students and lawyers to achieve their career goals.  Federal government career pathways have always been popular among both newly minted and experienced attorneys, but never more so than during the recession, when Uncle Sam was seen as maintaining one of the legal industry’s (relatively) safe employment harbors.  

Traditionally, one of the most confusing obstacles on the federal career path has been the highly bureaucratic application process.  In particular, many applicants find the the Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities (KSA) statement that is required for many federal positions to be loathsome.  Well, for all of those interested in making a career in federal service, here’s some exciting news from the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) director, as reported by the Government Executive:

The much-maligned essays on federal job applications known as knowledge, skills and abilities statements could be eliminated from the hiring process by April, Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry said on Tuesday.

Berry said he expects to send President Obama a plan next week outlining immediate hiring reforms, including shifting from KSAs on government applications to a résumé-based system. Obama could sign an executive order implementing the changes as early as April, the OPM chief said during the Federal Managers Association’s annual convention in Arlington, Va.

“We’ll get the federal system off of its island of KSAs, and onto the résumé base that the rest of the country is on,” Berry said. Federal job applicants long have complained that KSAs are cumbersome and inflexible.

Berry also outlined a series of proposed changes to management processes.  A note of caution on the KSAs: They refuse to die easily.  This is not the first time that there’s been talk of doing away with them.  Long-time public interest career advisors at law schools have told us that speculation about the KSAs’ demise seems to circulate every few years.  Nevertheless, support at the highest levels of federal personnel management for vanquishing them once and for all bodes well. 

KSAs or no KSAs, be sure to take advantage of PSLawNet’s extensive federal career resources.   

Final Notice: the survey response deadline is this Friday, 3/19.  Please spread the word.  And if  you work with a public interest organization, check to see if your office has participated in this very important undertaking.  Thanks!

Please participate in the National Association for Law Placement’s 2010 Public Sector & Public Interest Attorney Salary Survey. Every two years, NALP conducts this unique survey to gather important data on attorney salaries, benefits packages, and loan repayment assistance programs. Public interest law offices have relied upon data from past surveys in resetting salary scales, negotiating union contracts, implementing loan repayment programs, and in other ways.

Who should participate?

• Civil Legal Services Organizations
• Public Defender’s Offices
• District Attorney/Local Prosecutor’s Offices
• All other nonprofit, public interest law offices (e.g. those organizations that promote civil liberties, human rights, advocate for the homeless, etc.)

A hard copy of the survey was mailed to public interest organizations throughout the country on January 28, 2010. The survey is also available electronically here. (Please complete either the hard-copy or electronic version, not both.) All survey participants will receive a free electronic copy of the report when it is released later in the year. The survey response deadline has been extended to March 19, 2010.

Please contact Steve Grumm, NALP’s Director of Public Service Initiatives, with any questions: sgrumm@nalp.org or 202-296-0057.