Poverty and the Law Research Guide (IRTS-7017)

Access to Justice by Deborah L. Rhode "Equal Justice Under Law." This promise appears on courthouse doors across the land. But it by no means describes what goes on inside them. Equal access to justice is one of America's most proudly proclaimed principles. And one of its most frequently violated. In theory, the United States is deeply committed to individual rights. Yet few Americans can afford the legal representation necessary to exercise them. Only one percent of the nation's lawyers serve our poorest citizens, translating to one lawyer for every 1,400 poor people. The nation with theworld's greatest concentration of lawyers has one of the least accessible systems of justice. Written by America's leading expert on legal ethics, Access to Justice vividly chronicles the wide gap between the lofty aspirations and harsh realities of American justice. As Deborah L. Rhode demonstrates, America is overlawyered and underrepresented: there is too much law for those who canafford it and too little for everyone else. Although indigent defendants are entitled to legal representation, what satisfies that standard is an affront to the civilized world, and especially shameful for a nation that considers itself a world leader in human rights. Convictions are regularlyupheld when lawyers are asleep, on drugs, mentally incapacitated, or even parking their car during the prosecution's case. The justice system is not only inaccessible for the poor; it is increasingly out of reach for the American middle class as well. Rhode's analysis also includes on the firstcomprehensive national study of lawyers' charitable pro bono work ever conducted, encompassing some 3,000 attorneys. The average lawyer, she finds, contributes less than half an hour a week and fifty cents a day in support of representation for those who cannot afford it. Access to Justice avoids both simplistic lawyer-bashing and liberal lament. Rhode outlines what could and should be done to curb frivolous litigation, but focuses her attention squarely on the far greater problem of unnecessary expense and unaffordable remedies. A scathing indictment of America'slegal status quo, Access to Justice presents no mere manifesto but a reasoned and realistic agenda for lasting reform.

Justice for All? : The Rich and Poor in Supreme Court History 1790-1990 by Russell W. Galloway A concise historical look at how the Supreme Court has divided the spoils of litigation among the rich and poor in cases involving business regulation, welfare benefits, indigent criminal defendants, racial discrimination, and other economic issues.

The Rights of the Poor: The Authoritative ACLU Guide to Poor People's Rights by Helen Hershkoff; Stephen Loffredo Using a question and answer format, the authors provide a comprehensive account of the rights of the poor. They examine federal and state programmes providing income support and medical services as well as federal programmes providing food assistance and subsidized housing.

Does the Law Morally Bind the Poor? or, What Good's the Constitution When You Can't Afford a Loaf of Bread? by R. George Wright Consider the horror we feel when we learn of a crime such as that committed by Robert Alton Harris, who commandeered a car, killed the two teenage boys in it, and then finished what was left of their lunch. What we don't consider in our reaction to the depravity of this act is that, whether we morally blame him or not, Robert Alton Harris has led a life almost unimaginably different from our own in crucial respects. In "Does Law Morally Bind the Poor? or What Good's the Constitution When You Can't Buy a Loaf of Bread?," author R. George Wright argues that while the poor live in the same world as the rest of us, their world is crucially different. The law does not recognize this difference, however, and proves to be inconsistent by excusing the trespasses of persons fleeing unexpected storms, but not those of the involuntarily homeless. He persuasively concludes that we can reject crude environmental determinism without holding the most deprived to unreasonable standards.