This comment was submitted to the State Bar of California in support of the proposed Paraprofessional Program, which would authorize paraprofessionals to provide legal advice in areas such as family, consumer debt, landlord/tenant, employment/income, and collateral criminal cases, as well as represent parties in court (excluding jury trials).

Special masters can provide adjunct services to free up time for judges and court administrators—which has become crucial in the wake of the pandemic. But most people have very little experience with special masters or understanding of what they do. Think “Swiss army knife.”

The second two Paths to Justice convenings and webinars, focused on access to justice, brought together diverse perspectives and partners to discuss how we utilize key data from our US Justice Needs survey to drive action and system improvement, followed by an issue paper highlighting outcomes and key takeaways.

Lawmakers in California recently spoke out against the state bar's exploration of regulatory reform as a means to address the access-to-justice crisis. However, the need for efficient and affordable legal services is growing exponentially—and data suggests that legal services innovation could a key part of the solution.

As America continues to navigate the COVID-19 pandemic, some lawyers are noting an increase in divorce cases. Courts should be prepared to deal with these cases as quickly and efficiently as possible—and something that could aid their efforts is technology.

IAALS submitted this comment to the Oregon State Bar Board of Governors in support of the Proposed Oregon Legal Paraprofessional Licensing Program. The program would authorize paraprofessionals to provide limited legal services—without attorney supervision—in family law and landlord-tenant matters.

IAALS submitted this comment to the Michigan Supreme Court and the Lessons Learned Committee in response to the state’s preliminary report, Michigan Trial Courts: Lessons Learned from the Pandemic of 2020-21, Preliminary Findings, Best Practices, and Recommendations. The report highlights the common experiences that shaped the Michigan justice system throughout the pandemic.

Under many states’ current regulatory framework, a lawyer is the only option when it comes to addressing legal issues. Fortunately, however, a number of states are looking beyond lawyers—to limited licensed paraprofessionals, lay advocates, court navigators, and other types of allied legal professionals—in order to close the justice gap. And that number is growing.

The first two Paths to Justice convenings and webinars, focused on the pandemic, brought together diverse perspectives and partners to brainstorm lessons learned, identify continuing challenges, and inspire additional research. Out of those events, IAALS has published two issue papers highlighting outcomes and key takeaways.

In October, the Indiana Supreme Court published the Family Law Taskforce's final recommendations on how to make courts more efficient, less expensive, and easier to navigate in family law matters, with an emphasis in problem-solving, triage, training and stakeholder partnerships, and technology.

Throughout 2020, we saw just about every aspect of the legal profession move from in-person to virtual services. There have been a number of horror stories but also plenty of success stories, in which technology helped decrease court backlogs and increased access to the courts. So where does this leave us, and how do we move forward?

One of us is a law student. The other is a law professor. We’re both advocates for reforming legal education, particularly through expanded access to experiential learning opportunities. We're writing to highlight a model of experiential legal education—project-based learning—through a glimpse of Justice Lab, a course at the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law.