Signed: (Please note that titles and school affiliations are for information purposes only, and that the signers have added their names in their individual capacities as legal educators and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of any other person or institution.) Name (original) (raw)

En Banc Brief of Amici Curiae Law Professors James G. Dwyer, J. Herbie Difonzo, Jennifer A. Drobac, Deborah L. Forman, Marsha Freeman, William Ladd, Ellen Marrus, John E.B. Myers, and Deborah Paruch in Support of the Appellees

2014

Professor of Law at William & Mary School of Law, drafted the brief. Professor Dwyer is a nationally-renowned expert on the constitutional rights of parents and children. He has authored four books on the law of child rearing, including THE RELATIONSHIP RIGHTS OF CHILDREN (Cambridge University Press 2006); a family law textbook; and dozens of articles and book chapters on the rights of parents and children, including A Constitutional Birthright: The State,

University of Pennsylvania Law School Penn Law : Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship 1996 Biology , Justice , and Women ' s Fate

2014

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty\_scholarship Part of the Bioethics and Medical Ethics Commons, Biological Engineering Commons, Gender and Sexuality Commons, Genetics Commons, Health Law Commons, Health Policy Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Public Policy Commons, Science and Technology Commons, Women Commons, Women's Health Commons, and the Women's Studies Commons

Clinical Legal Education & Access to Justice: Conflicts, Interests, & Evolution

2013

The explosive growth in the number of law school clinics over the last 50 years began with an individual client focus as a core component. This contributed to reducing unmet legal needs in substantive areas such as landlord-tenant, family, consumer and other areas. These service clinics accomplished the dual purpose of training students in the day-today challenges of practice while reducing the number of unrepresented poor. In recent years, however, the trend has been to broaden the law school clinical experience beyond individual representation and preparation for law firm practice. So-called "impact" clinics typically address systemic change without significant individual client representation. In this chapter from the forthcoming volume, BEYOND ELITE LAW: ACCESS TO CIVIL JUSTICE FOR AMERICANS OF AVERAGE MEANS (Samuel Estreicher & Joy Radice eds., Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2014), the authors argue that the shift from service clinics to impact clinics is partly driven by clinicians' search for status within the academy. Specifically, status plays an important role in a clinic design that permits clinicians to more easily engage in theoretical and doctrinal scholarship on subject matters that are more respected within the academy. The authors predict that this trend toward development of impact clinics will continue, particularly at higher ranked law schools, with the unfortunate side effect of reducing clinics' contribution to addressing access to justice issues.

Brief of 13,922 Current Law Students at Accredited American Law Schools as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondants, Grutter v. Bollinger, No. 02-241 (US Feb. …

2003

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

Denying access to legal representation: The attack on the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic

Journal of Law & Policy

Denying Access to Legal Representation 35 Legal representation is not available to most Americans who have legal problems. A 1992 American Bar Association study, for example, found that each year approximately half of all low-income and moderate-income households face legal problems and that 71% and 61% of these households' legal needs, respectfully, are never addressed b y the civil justice system. 4 The number of lawyers working for the needy declined by about one-third since 1980, 5 with fewer than 20% of America's lawyers performing any pro bono legal services. 6 The supply of this limited, free work is usually restricted to routine legal matters and often "goes to friends, relatives, and organizations likely to attract paying clients." 7 Former President Jimmy Carter observed that "[n]inety percent of our lawyers serve ten percent of our people. We are over-lawyered and underrepresented." 8 When people require assistance to advance public interests, rather than private interests, the lack of legal representation is even more 4. A.B.A. CONSORTIUM ON LEGAL SERVICES AND THE PUBLIC, LEGAL NEEDS AND CIVIL JUSTICE: A SURVEY OF AMERICANS 15 (1994). In 1991, 85% to 92% of low-income residents in Louisiana with civil legal needs were unable to receive assistance from an attorney.