About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

88 Tul. L. Rev. 727 (2013-2014)

handle is hein.journals/tulr88 and id is 783 raw text is: Deregulating Public Interest Law Tom Lininger* The shortfall of legal services for iridgent clients is alannkzg The present rules seem unlikely to incentivize or require lawyers to addess adequately the unmet legal needs of the poor Several commentators have suggested the possibilty that increased regulation could Anprove access to legal services. Very little scholarship, however has considered whether the opposite proposition might be true: Could deregulation actually improve the availability oflegal services for the poor? 7hisArticle wil considerfourfairly radicalproposals: (1) liberalizing the restrictions on foreign attomeys in order to allow outsourcmg of legal aid services to India and Mexico, (2) permitting the practice ofpublic interest law by laypeople in related fields such as family counseling and social work (3) suspending the application of certain ethical rules to irdividuals and finns that exceed a minimum number ofpro bono hours, and (4) reining in the American Bar Association s accrei&ttion requirements in order to allow the cration of 'ublic interest academies that would provide a low-cost alternative for law students who aspire to practice public interest law Close scrutiny eveals that the first three ofthese proposals are not viable. But the fourth proposal could transform American legal education and gratly advance the goal ofequal access to justice ThisArticle concludes by noting some potential objections to the proposal forpublic interest academies and byidentif rig areas for future rsearch. I. INTRODUCTION ..........................................728 II. THE PERSISTENT SHORTAGE OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR ...........................................729 A. Only 20% Receive the LegalAssistance They Need........730 B. Current Rules andProgramsAre Inadequate.... ....733 C Proposals To Increase Regulation Are Unlikely To Help........................... ........736 III. POSSIBLE FRONTIERS FOR DEREGULATION To IMPROVE PUBLIC INTEREST LAw .......................... ......742 A. Permitting Outsourcing to India and Mexico.... ....743 B. Allowing Limted Practice byLaypeople in Related Fields.......... .............. .........750 C Relaxng Bar Regulations as a Reward for Pro Bono Work..................7..5..6.........756 * © 2014 Tom Lininger. J.D., Harvard; B.A., Yale. The author is the Orlando J. and Marian H. Hollis Professor of Law at the University of Oregon and served for ten years as the Faculty Director of the Public Interest/Public Service program at the University of Oregon School of Law. Students in the Legal Profession classes at the University of Oregon provided helpful insights about the challenges they face. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of administrators, faculty, or students of the University of Oregon. 727

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most