Saying it recognizes that thousands of its citizens are unable to afford legal services in civil cases, the Wisconsin Supreme Court is asking the state Joint Legislative Council to study how to improve legal access for those who cannot afford a lawyers. The Council’s role is to establish special committees to study major issues and recommend legislation every two years.
The Wisconsin Bar Association website reports that “… the court notes it has considered several other rule changes over the years to increase access to civil legal services, including a so-called Civil Gideon petition, which would require courts to appoint counsel in certain civil cases. The court acknowledged the need for increased legal services but did not approve the Civil Gideon petition for lack of funding. Funding remains an issue for the court system.” The “Civil Gideon” movement, led by programs in San Francisco and New York, is the idea that certain civil cases should include a right to an attorney similar to that provided criminal defendants. It is named after a landmark case that made criminal representation the law of the land.
In its press release last week. the court noted that one objective of a proposed Wisconsin Joint Legislative Council study committee would be to “brainstorm other possible sources of assistance and help to plan the most effective means of delivering services.” Read more at the WisBar website: State Supreme Court Seeks Legislative Study on Access to Civil Legal Services.
The Atlantic magazine has a new report out about “debtor prisons” in the St. Louis area, and it’s nothing short of alarming. The story by Whitney Benne and Blake Strode traces the problem all the way back to the pre-Civil War Dred Scott decision and includes details about how fairly routine municipal tickets – like for “saggy pants” – end up putting people in jail.
The report notes that “… as the recent deluge of reports and litigation confirms, and many have long known, thousands of people throughout the St. Louis metropolitan area are routinely sent to jail because they cannot pay local court fines and fees. These people are poor, and they tend to be black. While there are many terms to describe this—including, importantly, unconstitutional, —there is one with historical resonance reserved for such a practice: debtors’ prison.
The offer background: “… today, the ‘debts’ that lead to incarceration take the form of monetary penalties established and enforced by municipal courts. For many people throughout the St. Louis region, the nightmare of debtors’ prison is a recurring one: Each time a payment or court date is missed, the court issues another warrant, and the individual is subject to arrest, jail, and additional fines and court fees.
It is a case study in how the “gray area” of government activity, in this case charges that are serious enough to land you in jail but not “criminal” in the sense you have a right to an attorney, end up with significant jail time. Prepare your outrage meter and read the entire report: Debtors’ Prison in 21st-Century America.
The story is basically an indictment of the whole Immigration Court process with the only good point being a promise of more judges soon if certain things work out.
The Houston Press newspaper starts with immigration attorney John Nechman explaining how busy he used to be before “all of his removal cases scheduled to be heard in Houston’s downtown immigration court were reset to the same ten-day span in November, 2019.” And he says “it’s like that for every immigration attorney in town.” Obviously, the report points out, there’s no way all the cases actually scheduled for November, 2019 can be heard – it seems like a good holding date that’s still in this decade.
There are thousands of cases in Houston and also San Antonio and speculation is that they will actually get bumped back into the next decade. Nechman explains the irony: “good” cases, likely to be allowed to remain in the U.S. get the shaft because they remain in legal limbo for years and years; meanwhile, “bad” cases likely to get sent out of the country get years and years to become part of the culture and remain in the U.S. Houston has the most pending cases in Texas, and is nationally third behind Los Angeles and New York City.
If you’re among those who feel like the immigration court, which is actually an administrative function of the Justice Department and not a federal court at all, has become dysfunctional with its 450,000-case backlog, then this story confirms your worst fears.
Photo Credit: The U.S. Supreme Court is seen on Saturday in Washington, DC, following the announcement of the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
The political and criminal-law fallout from the sudden death of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is, of course, being widely discussed as President Obama prepares to nominate a successor. But NPR has done a good job at detailing a half-dozen cases that really illustrate how much Justice Scalia sculpted the modern civil litigation landscape.
Courts Monitor Publisher Sara Warner has written about a dangerous type of natural gas pipe that’s found in millions of American homes. It’s the focus of proposed changes in Lubbock, Texas where the mother of a man killed in a fire blamed on the pipe addressed the city council. It’s at The Huffington Post here: Victim’s Mom Questions Delay on Lubbock CSST Gas Line Reform.
A water court case in Colorado’s high country could create new policy that impacts the fast-growing marijuana industry in the Mile High state, the Aspen Daily News is reporting in conjunction with the Aspen Journalism non-profit journalism site. The report explains that a local marijuana cultivator, which works with a local dispensary, applied in 2014 for water rights for between 2,000 to 3,000 pot plants in a 25,000 square foot facility.
The report added that, “… whether the High Valley Farms case implodes the pot industry or not, the case is on track to set legal precedent.” Pro-marijuana advocates worry that the water court could consider growing to be “unlawful” under federal law, raising doubts about the recent state constitutional amendment legalizing pot not just for medical use but recreationally as well. One of the issues is whether cultivating pot is “beneficial” use under state law.
The federal Ninth Circuit Court has revived a challenge to California’s law against compensating alcohol retailers for advertising products, saying that recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions conflict with that regulation. The lawsuit at issue involves Retail Digital Network challenging the law under First Amendment arguments. The company installs liquid-crystal displays in retail stores and then enters into contracts with people wanting to advertise on those displays. That activity is outlawed by the California law, one of the nation’s strongest.
Read more from the Courthouse News Service here.
The idea of requiring some civil cases to have a “right to attorney” similar to criminal cases is often called “civil Gideon,” after the landmark Supreme Court case that cemented the right to an attorney so often referenced in TV programs. Some cities, most notably San Francisco and New York, have moved toward civil Gideon, often citing potential cost savings if fewer people lose their homes.
Read more about the Baltimore group here.