Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Sidestepping Lassiter On The Path To Civil Gideon: Civil Douglas, Steven D. Schwinn
Sidestepping Lassiter On The Path To Civil Gideon: Civil Douglas, Steven D. Schwinn
Faculty Scholarship
Civil Gideon advocates have at each turn faced the scourge of Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, which established (apparently out of whole cloth) a presumption that indigent litigants are entitled to appointed counsel only when physical liberty is at stake. This article proposes side-stepping that presumption by seeking a right to counsel on appeal via Douglas v. California, not a right to counsel at trial via Gideon v. Wainwright. Once established, a civil right to counsel on appeal would presage the inevitable downfall of Lassiter and the establishment of Civil Gideon. This article poses the argument …
Cause Lawyering And Social Movements: Can Solo And Small Firm Practitioners Anchor Social Movements?, Brenda Bratton Blom
Cause Lawyering And Social Movements: Can Solo And Small Firm Practitioners Anchor Social Movements?, Brenda Bratton Blom
Faculty Scholarship
As the demand for affordable legal services grows, law schools and the legal profession struggle to respond. By examining lessons from successful social movements in the last century, Cause Lawyering and Social Movements: Can Solo and Small Firm Practitioners anchor Social Movements looks at the Law School Consortium Project and its potential to participate in and anchor the social movements of our time. The collaboration of the law schools, networks of solo and small firm attorneys and activists at the local, regional and national level provide key elements for powerful change given the technological developments of the 21st century.
Rights Myopia In Child Welfare, Clare Huntington
Rights Myopia In Child Welfare, Clare Huntington
Faculty Scholarship
For decades, legal scholars have debated the proper balance of parents' rights and children's rights in the child welfare system. This Article argues that the debate mistakenly privileges rights. Neither parents' rights nor children's rights serve families well because, as implemented, a solely rights-based model of child welfare does not protect the interests of parents or children. Additionally, even if well-implemented, the model still would not serve parents or children because it obscures the important role of poverty in child abuse and neglect and fosters conflict, rather than collaboration, between the state and families. In lieu of a solely rights-based …