A2J Lab

Cartoon depicting the clear path to a life without parole sentence, in comparison to the procedural safeguards to a death sentence

Life Without Parole: A Call for Legal Reform

|

Life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) is often considered a better alternative to capital punishment. But death sentences carry certain safeguards to minimize error rates including counsel at all stages of the criminal process, federal scrutiny of sentences, appeals at the state level, pro bono firm support, and media attention. And yet, about 40 percent of death sentences in a 22-year time frame were overturned. Without those same safeguards, LWOP would likely have at least similar error rates—if only we knew. HLS student Kristen Arnold argues for evidence-based research to determine whether the absence of counsel and appeals reveal errors worth reforming procedural protections for those sentenced to life without parole.

Cartoon depicting a judge on a cellphone saying they're buying an autopen before affidavit review

Rubber Stamp or Real Safeguard? Inside Judicial Review of Search Warrants

|

In a Harvard Law Review article last June, three authors wrote about their empirical research on how judicial review of warrants work in practice and whether such submission and reviews of warrants offer a meaningful check on police power or simply a system of rubber stamps. While the data analysis proved to be complex in determining best practices, it revealed some troubling patterns.

Cartoon depicting a child welfare agent entering a home, without a judge's order, in the name of children's safety

Family Miranda: Expanding Due Process Rights to Child Welfare Investigations

|

Texas’s 2023 “Family Miranda” law requires child welfare investigators to inform parents of their due process rights at the beginning of an investigation. The intent is to reduce unnecessary state intervention, trauma, and coercion. The law passed with bipartisan support and ultimately clarifies existing law, rather than creates new law. In this “Student Voices” blog, HLS student Julia Saltzman calls for a randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy of the law in improving fairness and reducing unnecessary interventions.

Does Pretrial Detention Prevent Failure to Appear and New Criminal Activity?

|

The U.S. has embraced a ‘tough on crime’ narrative since the 1980s, and it’s reflected in the tripling of the nation’s jail population since that time. Most of the increase in jail population growth, however, is due to those detained pretrial. The courts explain this as a necessity to deterring failure to appear and new criminal activity by the individual. The data offers a different argument.

Cartoon depicting cycle of pretrial detention and the social and economic costs on communities

The Cost of Waiting: Economic and Social Impacts of Pretrial Detention

|

In 1987, the Supreme Court held that pretrial detention did not violate due process and is therefore constitutional. However, pretrial detention continues to raise humanitarian and justice concerns while also imposing serious and quantifiable costs on detained individuals, which, in turn, imposes economic and social costs on communities.

Cartoon depicting a soccer player being told by a ref to start using hands in the game.

Navigating Informed Consent: Challenges in Legal Research

|

In the United States, federal regulations protect the autonomy of individuals participating in research. That protection often takes the form of insisting that a potential participant provides informed consent before they can be randomized to one or another treatment. Sometimes, however, it is possible to proceed without eliciting informed consent from study participants. This fourth “Ethics of RCTs in the Law” series blog posts discusses the complexities of the informed consent process and the ethical considerations associated with research in a legal setting.

Cartoon depicting an outdated mandate requiring a typewriter in order to file for divorce

Unveiling the Complexity: Divorce and Access to Justice

|

Marriage in the U.S. typically requires a marriage license, payment of a nominal fee, and often a short waiting period from the license signing to marriage. Divorce, on the other hand, typically involves lawyers; courthouse visits; comparatively higher fees; and, in some cases, antiquated roadblocks just to implement this federal constitutional right. The result is that divorce can be an access-to-justice issue for low-income individuals who are faced with trying to pay for a lawyer they cannot afford or navigate unnecessarily complex divorce filing procedures on their own.  

Cartoon depicting an individual looking for specialized mental health court support but finding it closed to civil defendants

The Case for a Specialized Civil Mental Health Court

|

While specialized “problem-solving” courts have become common, there is still no equivalent civil mental health court in Massachusetts to handle complex issues like civil commitment and involuntary psychiatric treatment. The gap exposes the potential for the Commonwealth to learn from other states leading reform of the civil judicial system in this area and to pilot such a court and evaluate its impact through a randomized controlled trial.

Cartoon depicting legal delays for involuntarily committed psychiatric patients with schizophrenia seeking treatment in Massachusetts

Involuntarily Committed Patients Face Legal Obstacles, Treatment Delays

|

In Massachusetts, involuntarily committed psychiatric patients with schizophrenia often face systemic barriers to timely treatment from procedural inefficiencies that prioritize legal formalities over patient well-being.  To address this access to justice challenge, the Commonwealth could implement reforms to streamline the legal process while preserving patient rights.

Scroll to Top