Founder and executive director of Responsive Law. Husband, dad, baseball fan (Go Phils!). Tweets are my own views and often coincide with others' views.
The country of Niger is ruled by a military junta and has one of the lowest per capita incomes in the world. Americans and Nigeriens have an equally difficult time finding affordable legal help, according to the just released @TheWJP Rule of Law Index.
https://t.co/O0y5nzsYiK
America is in the midst of an access-to-justice crisis and broad prohibitions on the unauthorized practice of law are not helping.
For many Americans facing routine legal issues (related to divorce, child custody issues, etc.) hiring a lawyer is simply unaffordable.
🧵
@willhornsby@willhornsby Better preventive legal care would reduce the need for litigation. However, as long as we're governed by laws, we'll need legal services. Similarly, preventive medical care doesn't eliminate the need for doctors but does make medical care less costly.
False narrative #2: Allowing non-lawyer ownership and non-lawyer provision of legal services will harm the public. Nope again. When regulations have been reformed, evidence shows consumers get legal services as good or better than under traditional models.
Reforming regulations that prevent innovative legal services delivery is key to getting consumers affordable legal help. Our latest blog post (coauthored by our @ATomGordon and @JessicaBednarz) rebuts the false narratives raised bby opponents of reform.
https://t.co/PWtSzpXL0c
False narrative number one: "Access to justice is a low-income problem." Nope. Most people would have to work a week or more to afford one hour of a lawyer's help.
Reforming regulations that prevent innovative legal services delivery is key to getting consumers affordable legal help. Our latest blog post (coauthored by our @ATomGordon and @JessicaBednarz) rebuts the false narratives raised bby opponents of reform.
https://t.co/PWtSzpXL0c
Query: Should Pullman abstention apply when the state court's potentially clarifying action is regulatory in nature. Is a state SCT using power granted it by legislation to create an exception to UPL laws a resolution of unclear state law under Pullman?
The federal district court in SC has granted a stay in NAACP v. WIlson, holding that Pullman abstention applies. So tenants in SC will have to wait for months/years while this case takes a ride on the procedural merry-go-round.
https://t.co/kKcRKHxCux
The federal district court in SC has granted a stay in NAACP v. WIlson, holding that Pullman abstention applies. So tenants in SC will have to wait for months/years while this case takes a ride on the procedural merry-go-round.
https://t.co/kKcRKHxCux
We've filed a brief in federal court in South Carolina supporting the state @NAACP's First Amendment right to provide free legal advice to those facing eviction. https://t.co/rrdMXpmDIk
On @bobambrogi's podcast, @ATomGordon and @MarkovichMaya discuss their recent piece that @ABAesq *didn't* publish, arguing that the controversy around DoNotPay shows the need for more nuanced regulation of legal services, not a binary system of "lawyers: in; everyone else: out."
@natalalleycat The author says that "according to some sources, programs in Utah and Arizona may expand ownership of law firms to nonlawyers." It's difficult to cite the data from UT and AZ if you think that these models are just a rumor.
@bobambrogi@ABAesq Bob, thanks for publishing this (and for publishing my piece with @MarkovichMaya that surfaced all of this). I've added my thoughts here. https://t.co/AvtgBQERW4
Here's my take on the latest nonsense from the ABA. TL;DR: The ABA, which spouts rhetoric about access to justice and upholding the rule of law is trying to silence @ABAInnovation for talking about the former by acting like despots who destroy the latter.
Here's my take on the latest nonsense from the ABA. TL;DR: The ABA, which spouts rhetoric about access to justice and upholding the rule of law is trying to silence @ABAInnovation for talking about the former by acting like despots who destroy the latter.
Our brief in the @upsolvebk case argues that consumers have a First Amendment right to receive legal advice from trained non-lawyers. The gov't interest in "protecting consumers" (by denying them the only legal help available) doesn't outweigh this right. https://t.co/mXu7tQjHgj
The US is once again ranked among the worst in the world at providing affordable access to the civil justice system. We're the richest country in the world, but we're ranked worse than many of the poorest ones. @TheWJP https://t.co/uBOyf54eGX
@inspiredcat Decades ago, this commercial declared Andre Agassi to be a "rebel." Compared to others in his extremely conservative profession, it was probably accurate. The @ABAJournal's list of "legal rebels" is similar. https://t.co/tLl8fge77S
The ABA represents less than 15% of American lawyers, and it's not a representative sample. Those who want to expand access to legal solutions do; those who don't join the ABA and rail against the wind. https://t.co/z24zUEm5Gm
@erinlevine_ I believe the French call this "jolie-laide." Also, love the use of "outlaw," if I'm understanding it correctly. You might appreciate this: https://t.co/oCDQp6j5wU
If you live in CA, please call into the hearing Tuesday, June 21, 10am PT and state your opposition to AB 2958. The hearing phone number is 877-226-8163 and the access code is: 5069107.
More about the bill here: https://t.co/gjDsuIgMy2