Labor unions, known for advancing workers’ rights, are limited by the National Labor Relations Act and whom they represent. This scope typically excludes low-wage workers–namely, immigrants and gig workers–from unionization support. So where have these excluded workers found access to justice in the form of legal support and collective action organization? Community-based worker centers.
To make AI legal help truly accessible requires less focus on the AI tools themselves and more focus on the distribution channels where people will use them. Libraries, court self-help centers, community institutions, and kiosks all bring accessibility-related challenges from privacy, workflow support, and overreliance. This “Student Voices” post argues for AI literacy support, as well as improved policy standards and more funding, to help those who need legal AI help the most.
Do increased procedural protections for police officers undercut access to justice? Are citizens less likely to be able to hold police officers accountable for misconduct under the Law Enforcement Bill of Rights (LEOBR)? This potential conflict constitutes this week’s bonus post, which examines the history and efficacy of LEOBR while also proposing a randomized controlled trial to study both the perceived fairness and actual fairness of LEOBR.
Can AI be the superhero in wage recovery efforts? This “Student Voices” post illustrates the widespread wage theft problem in the U.S. juxtaposed with equally widespread indifference on the part of law enforcement, federal government, and other stakeholders.
The gap leaves room for technology and AI tools to be part of the triage picture.
Ineffective assistance of counsel counts among its more egregious causes lack of preparation, sleeping through trial, and drunkenness. So, what is the legal standard for this incompetence? This “Student Voices” bonus blog examines the Supreme Court’s Strickland and Cronic decisions, their application in capital cases, and potential reforms to provide a more just process for defendants.
The Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury—particularly for Black defendants facing disproportionately white juries—isn’t always a guarantee. This “Student Voices” blog proposes three reforms to be randomized and studied in real courts, rather than assuming they work, to mitigate possible implicit racial bias in juries.
Law could use a tool like AI to bridge the accessibility gap between practitioners and the pro se litigants attempting to navigate the legal field. In this second post in a two-part series on AI and the unauthorized practice of law (UPL), HLS student Elizabeth Guo outlines six points of argument in favor of AI and against UPL as the tool to regulate AI in legal practice.
To tackle one of the world’s largest backlog of cases awaiting judicial decisions, Brazil’s courts are relying on AI systems to prioritize cases, support legal research, and even draft judicial decisions. The change in process may help address cases much quicker but at what cost? Largely untested in the justice system, AI’s impact deserves rigorous evaluation before deploying it in real-world situations.
In the first of a two-part series on AI and the Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL), HLS J.D. candidate Elizabeth Guo explores current UPL rules, the challenging definition of “practice of law”, and the reasons why general-purpose AI tools will not likely be tested by UPL rules when it comes to providing legal information.
A Depression-era legal battle between the bar association and auto clubs like AAA pitted the financial interests of lawyers against those of consumers. When the bar won, it not only set forth a future of legal reform controlled by courts rather than lawmakers, it also laid the groundwork for a hundred years of access-to-justice issues that continue to plague the legal profession.
