About Free Legal Advice

Among the prevailing ideals of American society, perhaps none is more celebrated and better-known than its citizens' right to stand equally before the law. For low- and moderate-income residents, however, even securing competent legal help is difficult to access without the money to pay for it. These facts are well-established, yet the thornier question of what do about them has eluded conservative and liberal debaters since the 1960s. A look at the varying approaches that have been tried provides a telling insight into their past and present standing on America's priority scale.

History

America has a well-established tradition of attorneys working without payment, or pro bono -- a Latin phrase meaning, "for the public good." Attorney Clarence Darrow was among the best-known proponents of this practice, such as in his 1925 defense of John T. Scopes for teaching evolution. However, no systematic federal approach existed until President Lyndon Baines Johnson created the Office of Economic Opportunity, or OEO, in 1964. The OEO founded numerous legal services programs that fueled resentment among officials on the receiving end of its federally funded lawsuits. However, legal aid for the poor began withering after Richard Nixon took office in 1968. Forced to seek a different arrangement, supporters lobbied in Congress, which responded in 1974 by creating the Legal Services Corp., or LSC.

Time Frame

The LSC enjoyed steady growth until President Ronald Reagan's 1980 electoral victory. Angered by what they saw as the agency's pursuit of liberal priorities, Reagan and his conservative allies first tried to eliminate the agency completely, waged bitter battles over appointing its 11-member board, and continually slashed its budget. Funding improved during the Bush and Clinton administrations. However, the Republicans' 1994 return to majority rule in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate led to a blizzard of new restrictions. These included prohibitions against LSC-funded agencies from joining class-action lawsuits over the administration of public health funds as well as new strictures on representing illegal immigrants. This has led to non-LSC agencies and attorneys taking cases that are off-limits to their LSC counterparts, who offer any logistical support that does not run afoul of the restrictions.

Size

By any objective standard, the problem of low-income access to legal services is enormous. In 2005, an LSC study estimated that 80 percent of Americans -- representing roughly a million cases -- were turned away because they did not know that legal aid programs existed or assumed they would not qualify for the help, The Washington Post reported. The study, "Documenting the Justice Gap," suggested that low-income households experienced one civil legal need per year. However, the authors pointed out that there is just one legal aid attorney per 6,861 people, versus one in 525 for the general population. Unless Congress saw fit to increase funding, the study concluded, one person would be turned down for every person helped by an LSC-funded program.

Effects

The issue of pro bono work remains a source of debate in the legal community. In 1969, the American Bar Association adopted language stating that all attorneys, regardless of reputation or workload, should dedicate some time to pro bono work. By 1993, this amount had been quantified to 50 hours per year, which found its way into 43 state bar codes. However, these requirements are not binding, so there is no practical impact. Attorneys from the nation's 100 most successful firms only donate eight minutes of time annually to pro bono work, a 2007 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics article stated. Additionally, most of this work is being done for family members and friends, the article noted, at a time when unmet legal needs are rising.

Considerations

A 5.74 percent increase in poverty rates has led to some 43 million Americans qualifying for federal legal assistance. This situation is mostly driven by such financial complications as eviction from rental housing or bankruptcy arising from an inability to pay basic bills. Other significantly unmet needs included consumer and family law as well as concerns about employment, health care and government benefits. No state bar has imposed a mandatory pro bono requirement, prompting some observers to advocate doing just that -- given the meager returns that have emerged. Sixteen states are trying a voluntary approach in which attorneys report how much pro bono time they spend. Proponents contend this system reminds attorneys of their obligations, makes others aware of a public service opportunity, and helps the state bar determine where the needs are greatest.

Resources

• Eighty Percent of Poor Lack Civil Legal Aid.
• Meeting the Demands of the Indigent Population.
• Pro Bono Net