Proof Over Precedent™

“My criminal record doesn’t reflect who I am anymore.” This sentiment overwhelmingly topped the list of reasons why expungement study participants wanted to clear their record that it seemed plausible to predict that clearing one’s criminal record would lead to higher levels of life satisfaction. Likewise, it did not seem far-fetched to assume individuals without a criminal record would fare better in obtaining housing than those with one. In both cases though, the A2J Lab and Kansas Legal Services found surprising results to refute these assumptions.

The A2J Lab’s randomized control trial on expungement examined the uptake and obstacles of criminal record clearing while also looking into its effect on various socio-economic outcomes. This week’s Proof Over Precedent episode gathers study researchers to discuss the “surprising and depressing” findings on expungement’s effect on employment. They also dive into explanations for the stark difference between individuals’ optimism and reality in the experiment.

Is the form-filling expungement process as easy for unrepresented individuals as some believe? In this week’s Proof Over Precedent episode, host Jim Greiner welcomes the A2J Lab team involved in our long-running Kansas-based study looking at the current record-clearing process and its obstacles. The results offer clear evidence for what it takes for a successful expungement.

Facing an eviction, a tenant has to decide if the added expense of an attorney is worth it for the possibility of avoiding an eviction judgment. In a discussion of a randomized controlled trial outside the A2J Lab, Faculty Director Jim Greiner talks with economists Aviv Caspi and Charlie Rafkin about when, why, and whether lawyers make a difference in evictions cases. The study coincided with a government emergency housing fund that expired during the RCT, which helped answer how lawyers can best make a difference as well.

State bar associations typically file more UPL complaints than consumers. Given the intended aim of protecting consumers, UPL may actually be serving more as an obstacle and less as a protection for consumers using generative AI in the legal space. That’s the argument Wake Forest Law Professor and UPL expert Ellen Murphy makes in the latest Proof Over Precedent episode, where she identifies the legal industry’s progress with AI regulation by state and how AI and human counseling may combine to be the strongest access-to-justice resource.

The low cost and accessibility of AI make it a potential game changer for pro se litigation and the future of affordable legal aid. But with the patchwork of state unauthorized practice of law (UPL) rules and no court resolution on AI’s UPL liability, it also faces an uncertain future as a legal tool. HLS students tackle the issue in the latest Proof Over Precedent and distinguish between legal information and legal advice—a key to general-purpose AI’s future in law.

When the organized bar association faced financial strain during the Depression, it cracked down on low-cost legal service providers via auto clubs like AAA, contributing to today’s access-to-justice gap. In this “How did we get here?”-style episode, HLS student Andrew Reed interviews Stanford Professor Nora Freeman Engstrom and University of Chicago Fellow James Stone about their research and the “revolution” taking place in many states to reform the legal profession.

How likely would you be able to answer questions under duress seated in a hard chair in a windowless, flourescent-lit box of a room? What about in a larger space with natural lighting and comfortable seating? In this episode of Proof Over Precedent, HLS student Spencer Thieme discusses interrogation rooms and the effect of a physical environment on stress, memory, disclosure, and false confessions. She also considers potential randomized controlled trials for studying interrogation room design.

The role of trained nonlawyer volunteers is at the center of a back-and-forth court case between nonprofit Upsolve, Inc. and Letitia James, attorney general of the state of New York. This “Student Voices” episode tackles both the access to justice issues at stake for indigent defendants in debt collection cases, as well as New York’s unauthorized practice of law statute governing the decision(s), including the most recent ruling by the New York District Court in March.

In this week’s Proof Over Precedent episode, we look at civil forfeiture—law enforcement’s seizing and relinquishing of property based on probable cause in a criminal connection—and the impact it has on individuals, including innocent third-party owners. With no guaranteed right to counsel for these cases, most individuals never challenge forfeitures; the barriers are simply too high. Limited research means the practice of civil forfeiture is ripe for a study that goes beyond its impact on potential for future crime and expands to due process.

In this “Student Voices” episode, HLS J.D. candidate Matthew Hohmann interviews Hon. Rowan Wilson, Chief Judge of the New York Court of Appeals, about the challenges facing litigants in New York Family Court, a topic he focused on in his 2026 State of the Judiciary address. Hear about his holistic, long-range view in approaching family court cases.

This week’s “Student Voices” episode of Proof Over Precedent explores access to justice issues for incarcerated parents in the child welfare system. HLS student Mia Robertson looks at the process of removing a child from a home, working toward permanent placement and/or reunification, and the numerous barriers an incarcerated parent faces in custody cases, from an inability to show up for in-person hearings to a lack of reliable communication with an attorney (if they have counsel representation at all).

This week, Proof Over Precedent speaks with Melody Webb, Founder and Executive Director of the Mother’s Outreach Network, a Washington, DC-based racial justice and anti-poverty organization that the Access to Justice Lab partnered with in its Mother Up pre-pilot study. Webb shares her vision for the study—which looks at providing Black indigent mothers with guaranteed income to support their children in an effort to reduce child welfare agency involvement—and offers perspective on the preliminary findings from the pilot.

A2J Lab Director and Professor Jim Greiner sat down with five A2J Lab staff members to discuss “Mother Up”, a DC guaranteed income pre-pilot program with Mothers Outreach Network for Black mothers with recent CFSA involvement. The privately funded program explored how feasible it would be to conduct a larger study on the subject of guaranteed income, but this episode of Proof Over Precedent looks into why the Lab got involved with the program, how we gathered and analyzed data to apply to future evidence-leading studies, and what we’re seeing with results so far.

The Empower Parents with Resources Study is the largest randomized control trial of the effect of unrestricted cash gifts on child maltreatment in the United States. Researchers aim to find out if a reduction in financial stress equals a reduction in child welfare involvement. In this week’s Proof Over Precedent episode, HLS J.D. candidate Julia Saltzman interviews researcher William Schneider, who explains the broad impact the study may have on families, caseworkers, and child welfare policy.

If poverty can sometimes appear as neglect within a family, would better social and legal support help prevent unnecessary child welfare involvement? An Access to Justice Lab ongoing randomized controlled trial aims to find out. This episode gives a research partner’s point of view to the trial.

In this week’s Proof Over Precedent episode, HLS J.D. candidate Strong Ma discusses how public perceptions of fairness influence the adoption of AI and algorithms in medicine and law, two industries with varying levels of support and trust in AI. The podcast includes interviews with HLS Professors Jim Greiner and Jon Hanson weighing in on AI’s strengths and shortcomings in law, particularly as it compares to human decision making.

Is ending cash bail a path to a fairer justice system? California attempted this route in 2018 with its SB10, which would have ended cash bail statewide and replaced it with pretrial risk assessment. The effort could potentially have avoided a two-tiered, wealth-based system, but it fell short with voters. This “Student Voices” episode of Proof Over Precedent dives into the debate over cash bail, what went wrong with the SB 10 campaign, and lessons for future bail reform efforts.

This episode of Proof Over Precedent looks at predictive modeling research that could be used alongside policy research to answer the question, “What can we do to increase the number of criminal records cleared?” Researchers examined existing data on automatic record sealing in Pennsylvania and petition-based expungements in Kansas and adjusted criteria that could contribute to more effective record clearing. In the process, they made surprising discoveries on the state and future of criminal record clearances.

In this episode of Proof Over Precedent, the criminal record clearing process gets a close-up examination. Researchers and a former field partner at Kansas Legal Services discuss an expungement study in Kansas that reveals the numerous, and sometimes prohibitive and illogical, steps it takes for an individual to clear a record – a task made exponentially more difficult and less likely to succeed without the aid of legal representation.