Skip to comments.Justice Sotomayor's Very Bad, No Good Idea For Lawyers (mandatory pro bono work)
Posted on 05/24/2016 8:41:24 AM PDT by reaganaut1
On May 16 at an American Law Institute meeting, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor declared that she was in favor of forced labor at least to the extent of compelling lawyers to do enough pro bono work so that poor people in America can have legal representation when they need it.
Many lower income Americans are unable to afford legal assistance when they need it. The legal establishment has known that for a long time, and often indulges in hand-wringing over it. Some law firms require their attorneys to engage in pro bono work, donating their time to help poor people. No doubt that has marginally reduced our access problem, but it remains so serious that Justice Sotomayor thinks we should ratchet up the level of coercion in America another notch to solve it.
If I had my way, she declared, I would make pro bono service a requirement.
Fortunately, we have not reached the point where one or even all the members of the Supreme Court can impose such a mandate on the legal (or any other) profession. For one thing, there is the considerable obstacle of the Thirteenth Amendment, prohibiting involuntary servitude. That amendment should be read to prohibit all kinds of forced labor, including that done under the governmental threat here: Perform enough free work or you will lose your license to work at all.
Writing on the always interesting Volokh Conspiracy blog, professor Ilya Somin argues that while there is a century old Supreme Court precedent against treating the Thirteenth Amendment as a bar to compulsory pro bono work for lawyers, that decision is flawed and should not be treated as controlling. But in any case, he says, forced labor is a deeply unjust violation of individual liberty.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
So how much of her personal time does the Wide Latina use in this way? (advocating for liberal agenda items doesn’t count, only helping individuals with mundane legal issues)
If none or very little, then she should shut her piehole.
Taxpayers already have issued “blank checks” to our legal system but I guess that’s not enough for her.
Only Republicans opposse slavery. It’s always been that way.
DemocRATS have always been the party of involuntary servitude.
MrR is an attorney in a state where he is not required to do ProBono work. However, since he has pretty much retired, that is all he does. He does it because he wants to help people, because he sees his legal work as a type of ministry not because he has to. He went into law to help people (no he is not a liberal) and that is what he does.
It is a false assumption all lawyers are only in it for the money and compelling them to do pro bono makes them want to do it less, remove the requirement and many more will do it freely.
How many high schools in the country have as a graduation requirement a specified number of hours of community service?
Just how do you force people to work against their will?I think it’s wrong forcing people to do something Probono.On the other hand,if a lawyer or any other profession voluntarily does it than good for them.They should not be coerced.
You want a license to practice law, you donate X hours per month pro-bono.
You want a license to practice medicine, you donate X hours per month pro-bono.
We’re heading there.
Without a doubt, especially if you got Federal student loans.
1) If providing the service is a requirement for licensing, it is not “pro bono” but rather is just a tax (paid by labor).
2) As with mandatory continuing legal education, the administration of mandatory pro bono would provide jobs to many unemployed lawyers (of which there are very many).
3) We have a vast oversupply of lawyers.
We’d be better off
If the uppity beaner
Just cleaned my toilet
Wed be better served
If her wisdom directed
To scrubbing commode
The wise latina
After the revolution
Has date with rope
as an aside:
Wait a minute
You forgot tortillas?
Sure, after you, miz latina.
Liberal-tarianism does not believe in pro bono requirements.
We let the Left light that candle a decade or so ago when we let them make public service a mandatory requirement to graduate from high-school.
Mandatory tithing to the gods of SJ.
Yes, many people need lawyers to wring more free shit out of the government and to legally steal private property
I think that’s what Sotomayor means
This will require a Federal Regulatory Office of Mandatory Pro-Bono Work Accountancy and a new Czar.
Oh, not to mention, a new form (or ten) to be included in an attorney’s annual tax returns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.