by Ashley Matthews

Next year, New York will start implementing the nation’s first state-mandated pro bono for new lawyers trying to pass the bar. This requirement has led many graduating law students to amp up their volunteer efforts in hopes of meeting the 50-hour requirement.

But it’s not just New York’s graduating law students who are reaching out to populations in need. From the ABA Journal:

Call Richard Horstman the poster child for pro bono programs.

For more than 34 years, Horstman has worked in Houston-based Marathon Oil’s corporate legal department, where he now oversees all international legal operations. Until five years ago, he didn’t give a second thought about doing pro bono legal work.

“I always felt I did enough law at work,” he says. “I focused my public service and community work on nonlegal matters.”

In 2007, Marathon’s then-general counsel instituted a formal pro bono program for the company’s lawyers. As part of the new effort, Catholic Charities made a presentation highlighting the legal needs of immigrant children in the United States.

Horstman agreed to tackle a single case. It changed his perception of himself and his practice. “I realized that I am one of the few who can do this because of my expertise as a lawyer,” he says.

While Horstman doesn’t favor state-mandated pro bono, he thinks law firms and in-house corporate legal departments should implement formal pro bono efforts that strongly encourage their lawyers to get involved.

“I regret that I didn’t start doing pro bono earlier,” he says.

In New York, recent law graduates are now required by law to get the head start Horstman never had. Do you think state-mandated pro bono work should be required to practice law in your jurisdiction?

From Community Legal Services of Philadelphia:

CLS seeks bright, energetic law students who are committed to, or interested in learning more about, a career in public interest law. Interns will be assigned to a specific CLS unit and, depending on assignment, may have the opportunity to do legal research and writing, client interviewing and counseling, community education, representation at administrative or court hearings, and trial advocacy. In addition, through special programs and training sessions, interns will be exposed to the full range of CLS practice.

We particularly invite internship applications from students who are interested in later applying for a post-graduate fellowship. In recent years, CLS has been awarded Skadden, Independence Foundation, and Equal Justice Works fellowships, and the experience gained and contacts made during an internship at CLS can be invaluable in the fellowship application process.

Want more information? Check out the full listing at PSJD.org (log-in required)!

The Emory Public Interest Committee (EPIC, Emory Law School’s public interest student group) is delighted to announce their conference entitled “And Justice for All? Criminal Justice in the South.”  The conference will be held on Saturday, October 13, 2012, at Emory University School of Law, and it will broadly track the core stages a criminal defendant goes through as s/he moves throughout the justice system:  pre-trial, trial, and post-conviction.  The conference seeks to engage participants in a meaningful and balanced dialogue concerning the flaws within the Southern justice system, as well as possibilities for alternatives and reform.

Following a keynote address by Stephen Bright, president and senior counsel for the Southern Center for Human Rights, the conference will feature three sets of panel discussions with topics such as search and seizure, prison conditions, and rehabilitation of released defendants.  All panels will address these issues with a special emphasis on identifying existing inadequacies and possible reform within the South.  The conference will address and examine the existing problems and potential for change from a wide range of perspectives, including legislators, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement officials, and judges.

Information is available at http://www.law.emory.edu/academics/conferences/2012-epic-conference.html, and registration is open now.  There is no fee to attend (small charge for those seeking CLE credits), but registration is requested in order to plan for materials and meals.  Please email conference co-chairs Anam Ismail and Steve Justus at epicconference2012@gmail.com if you have any questions.

by Ashley Matthews

This week, the topic of SCOTUSblog’s online symposium is the Voting Rights Act (VRA), but it’s one particular section of the 1965 legislation that has brewed a constitutional debate over 40 years in the making. From the Pro Publica blog:

A single provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 has been playing a key role on the election front this year. Section 5 has blocked photo voter-ID laws, prohibited reduced early-voting periods in parts of Florida and just Tuesday barred new redistricting maps in Texas.

For states and counties covered under Section 5’s jurisdiction, changes to voting laws can’t legally be enforced unless the proposed change is submitted for review to the Attorney General or after a lawsuit before the United State District Court for the District of Columbia. In order to be legally enforceable, the new voting law can’t deny or abridge the right to vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group.

In 2006, Congress voted to extend the Voting Rights Act for another twenty-five years. In the 2009 Supreme Court case Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder, the Court declined to strike down the law but noted that it raised serious constitutional concerns.

Now, in South Carolina, a new law that would require a state-approved photo ID to vote prompted a Justice Department challenge. A 3-judge panel in Washington, DC is now considering whether the law will be allowed to take effect before November 6 election. Last month, a federal court struck down a similar law in Texas, ruling that it would harm the turnout from minority voters. In addition, voters who lacked proper documentation would have been required to pay a fee to obtain election ID cards – a provision the court called a “strict, unforgiving burden on the poor.”

Such blocks have many crying constitutional foul. Joshua Thompson, a guest contributor for SCOTUSblog, wrote earlier today about the burden of Section 5:

Given the rampant discrimination of the Jim Crow South, this burden seems quite reasonable.  Nevertheless, when the constitutionality of Section 5 was first brought before the Court in South Carolina v. Katzenbach in 1966, the Court called it an “uncommon exercise of congressional power” that was only justified by the “exceptional conditions” of the day.  Section 5 would not have been “otherwise appropriate” but for its structure targeting jurisdictions bent on “evad[ing] the remedies for voting discrimination” and violating the Fifteenth Amendment.

By targeting only those jurisdictions most defiant of constitutional protections, Section 5’s “burdens” were specifically tailored to its “needs.”  Fortunately, the snug fit between the burdens – the “uncommon exercise of Congressional power” – and the needs – eliminating pervasive discrimination throughout the Deep South – had a tremendous effect on the enfranchisement of black Americans.  Eliminating literacy tests, and requiring preclearance for the most discriminatory jurisdictions, immediately improved black enfranchisement.  Black voter registration in Mississippi, for example, jumped from seven percent in 1964 to sixty percent a mere four years later.

Thompson continues:

Alongside this sweeping cultural upheaval came scores of elected black officials, and the abandonment of the racially oppressive policies that once justified Section 5.  No jurisdiction imposes a literacy test today, or a poll tax, or a grandfather clause.  Today, as reported by the Northwest Austin Court, “[v]oter turnout and registration rates … approach parity.  Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare. And minority candidates hold office at unprecedented levels.”   Section 5 was so effective that there is little to distinguish the covered jurisdictions of the Deep South from the non-covered jurisdictions in the rest of the country.  Allegations of discrimination are just as likely to come from non-covered jurisdictions, and “the racial gap in voter registration and turnout is lower in the States originally covered by § 5 than it is nationwide.”

Further, Section 5 is ill-suited to address discriminatory voting practices of today.  The systemic, race-based discrimination that made Section 5 practical in 1965 no longer exists.  Moreover, modern voting problems often arise from failing to change existing practices.  Voters suffer from more problems like long voting lines in minority districts, voter identification problems, poor ballot design, or outmoded technology than from active efforts by states to impose new, discriminatory practices.  But Section 5 obstructs change by requiring all covered jurisdictions to undergo a costly and burdensome administrative process in order to preclear any changes with the federal government.  This encourages jurisdictions to maintain their old, perhaps discriminatory, voting practices.

SCOTUSblog’s Online VRA Symposium offers many different viewpoints. What do you think about the applicability of Section 5 to today’s modern electoral climate?

The American Civil Liberties Union in New York City and San Francisco are looking for summer interns for its Immigrants’ Rights Project!

Summer legal interns work on an array of litigation projects, conduct legal and policy research, draft memos and briefs, and research prospects for new litigation, among other duties.

The ACLU is seeking applicants with a demonstrated commitment to civil rights, social justice and civil liberties issues.

Sounds perfect for you? Check out the full listing at PSJD.org (log-in required)!

Do you know a law student who’s a public interest/pro bono rock star?  NALP is seeking nominations for the 2012 PSLawNet/PSJD Pro Bono Publico Award. 

Download the Nomination Form Here!

Purpose: To recognize the significant contributions that law students make to underserved populations, the public interest community, and legal education by performing pro bono or public service work.

Eligibility: The Pro Bono Publico Award is available to any second- or third-year law student at a PSJD Subscriber School. The recipient will be honored during an Award Luncheon at NALP’s Public Service Mini-Conference on Thursday, October 25, 2012 at the Washington, DC office of Crowell & Moring, LLP. The award recipient will receive transportation to Washington, a one-night stay in an area hotel, a commemorative plaque, and a small monetary award.

Award Criteria: Law students are judged by the extracurricular commitment they have made to law-related public service projects or organizations; the quality of work they performed; and the impact of their work on the community, their fellow students, and the school. Though a student’s involvement in law school-based public interest organizing and fundraising is relevant; actual pro bono and public interest legal work will be the primary consideration. 

Nomination Deadline & Packet Contents: Nominations must be received by Friday, September 14, 2012 at 5pm Eastern Time, by fax, mail, or email (see contact information at bottom). Along with the nomination form and a résumé, nomination packets may include any materials which support a nominee’s candidacy; such as letters of recommendation, statements detailing a nominee’s work, and media articles. 

by Ashley Matthews

Last week, Above the Law ran an article about an Ohio State University grad who decided to postpone her law school education to drive an Oscar Mayer Weinermobile cross-country as a hotdogger. While this may seem like an odd detour, her decision to defer law school admission should not come as a surprise. With the rising costs of tuition, dim job prospects, and the threat of insurmountable student loans, many students are second-guessing their decision to attend law school. And those that are currently in law school want more bang for their buck – including that dream job.

For public interest law students, this may be even harder to attain with increased competition for jobs at legal organizations that are facing major budget cuts and layoffs.

There is, however, a silver lining to the dark cloud of uncertainty that hangs over many recent graduates, especially those focused on public interest. It’s called social entrepreneurship, and chances are you have heard of it before. It’s a constantly evolving field, and social entrepreneurs are known to be passionate risk-takers with undying determination.

Social entrepreneurs see a need and come up with innovative ways to address it. The “need” may actually be a problem or issue, and usually social entrepreneurs create a project or non-profit to fill a gap in services currently being provided to help targeted populations. A law degree increases access to resources that many populations need, so social entrepreneurship is a good example of an alternative career route for those with a great idea.

If you’re interested in using your law degree to trailblaze your own path, check out PSJD’s guide to project-based fellowships or the Yale Guide to Postgraduate Public Interest Fellowships for tips and funding information. Many fellowships specifically require applicants to collaborate with a host organization, but some, like Echoing Green and Ashoka, do not.

by Ashley Matthews

Here at PSJD, we are constantly thinking of ways to connect law students and lawyers with public interest jobs and career-building resources. The main way we do this is through our website, where employers can post new public interest opportunities for interested job seekers, who are also able to browse our library of resources. And of course, we post great opportunities, news and resources to this blog and our Facebook page everyday.

In our latest effort to bridge communication between employers, career service leaders, and job seekers, PSJD is proud to announce the launch of its new live weekly Twitter chat! Kicking off on September 26th at 3 pm, #PSJDChat will feature weekly topics designed to build a supportive community around the daunting process of looking for legal employment. The first #PSJDChat topic will be“Personal Branding: Using Social Media During The Job Hunt”.

The goal of #PSJDChat is to encourage our Twitter community to learn from one another by sharing insight, info, horror stories, success stories and everything in between. #PSJDChat is the first and only Twitter mixer dedicated solely to law students and lawyers looking for public interest employment, so this is the (virtual) place to meet new like-minded friends followers, ask questions, find support, and get advice from those in-the-know.

You don’t have to do anything but tweet with the hashtag #PSJDChat to join, but we recommend using TweetChat as an easy way to participate and keep up with the discussion without your timeline distracting you. TweetChat will allow you to view a filtered version of the chat with only our discussion, and will also automatically add #PSJDChat to all your tweets so you don’t have to! When the time comes, just log in with your Twitter username and password, and enter #PSJDChat to join us. If you’re still confused, check out MediaBistro’s How-To article, or email us at psjd@nalp.org with any questions.

Although the chat is informal, all we ask is that you stay on-topic as much as possible, and tweet “#PSJDChat” so everyone involved knows you are a part of the discussion. Also, don’t forget to make your Twitter profile public! If your account is private, no one in #PSJDChat will be able to see your replies. Last but not least, tell all your friends! The more people involved, the better the discussion.

After every chat, you can check this blog for transcripts of the discussion, standout tweets, and a recap of what went down. Here’s a schedule of our upcoming Twitter chats and topics:

Wednesday, September 26, 2012, 3 PM: “Personal Branding: Using Social Media During The Job Hunt”

Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012, 3 PM: “Drafting the Perfect Public Interest Cover Letter”

Wednesday, October 10th, 2012, 3 PM: “Drafting the Perfect Public Interest Resume”

Wednesday, October 17th, 2012, 3 PM: “Tips & Tricks for Successful Interviewing & Networking”

See you all on Twitter, and don’t forget to follow us @PSJDTweets!

Today’s job of the day is in the Sunshine State! The Bradenton office of Gulf Coast Legal Services, Inc. in St. Petersberg, FL is looking for a new public interest staff attorney to join their team. The attorney will mainly provide advocacy for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence during injunction proceedings, and will also participate in community outreach and training efforts on behalf of victims. Gulf Coast encourages applications from bi-lingual attorneys (Spanish and English).

For more information, check out the full listing on PSJD.org (log-in required)!

By: Steve Grumm

Uncle Sam recently implemented large-scale changes to the federal hiring system.  This directly impacts both law students and attorneys.  Here’s a great article, “The Pathways Program: Clearing the Way to Entry-level Federal Employment”, from PSJD summer 2012 intern extraordinairre Maria Hibbard.

And don’t forget to use PSJD’s detailed federal career resources page.