by Tom Gordon

In comments submitted this week to the State Bar of California, Responsive Law urged the Bar's Board of Trustees to approve the recommendation of a Bar-appointed working group that the state should begin licensing paralegals to provide services directly to the public. The recommendation was approved by 15 of the 19 working group members, including all the judges, all the public members, and a majority of the lawyers on the group.

Our comments pointed out that the four dissenting members are all lawyers who were nominated to the working group by constituencies that fear the economic impact of competition from licensed paralegals. You can read the comments in their entirety here. 

​by Tom Gordon

Throughout 2021, the State Bar of California Closing the Justice Gap Working Group has been holding hearings and gathering data so that it can make an informed decision about how to structure a regulatory sandbox, Such a sandbox would allow regulators of the legal industry to test regulatory reforms and gather data about their impact on access to legal help and consumer protection. The working group consists of volunteers—both lawyers and others—from a variety of backgrounds. It is expected to make recommendations to the State Bar in September 2022.

In a December 7 letter to the chair of the State Bar Board of Trustees, the chairs of the California Senate and House Judiciary Committees urged the State Bar to “focus on its core mission of protecting the public by correcting the delays and defects in the attorney discipline system.” This unnecessary pressure on the Bar is not only premature, but also ill-informed.

by Tom Gordon
​​
Earlier this month, the World Justice Project released its annual Rule of Law Index, ranking the commitment of 139 countries to the rule of law. Although the United States ranked 27th overall, it continued to perform among the worst in the world in access to its civil legal system.

by Tom Gordon

Yesterday, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that TIKD, an app that helped people affordably fight traffic tickets, was engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. If you want to read legal arguments about why TIKD's service does not fall under UPL laws, you should read Responsive Law's amicus brief in the case, as well as the dissenting opinion to the court's decision. But the bigger issue here is not the legal standard for UPL; it's the system that continues to maintain those laws as a weapon against consumer choice, while claiming they are a shield to protect consumers.

​by Owen Walsh

On a late night in my first semester of college, I received a strange text from my older brother. I had always known him as a stubbornly independent kid, and now adult. The guy I knew would let a wound fester, and a black and blue limb fall off. Then, and only then, might he ask for Scotch tape to reattach it. So, I was disarmed when he asked for my help.
​