Built for Lawyers, Not People: Making Courts Work for Self-Represented Litigants

Self-represented litigants (SRLs) are individuals who appear in court without legal counsel, often with little to no support or guidance. The difficulty they face does not stem simply from proceeding without expert help, but from navigating a court system that was not designed with them in mind. Research from IAALS and others illustrates what many SRLs experience firsthand: they are not only without counsel, but often without meaningful support, clear instructions, or the practical knowledge necessary to move their cases forward. As a result, access to justice is shaped as much by system design as by the merits of a case. 

Drawing from qualitative research, we examine how the current system operates in practice, where it falls short, and what reforms are already underway. At IAALS, projects like the Uncomplicated Courts Initiative aim to redesign processes to help courts better serve the people who use them. This requires starting with the user perspective. While available qualitative research is still limited and evolving, it offers critical insight into the lived experiences of SRLs. By centering these experiences, we can begin to identify practical, user-informed solutions and move toward a court system that works for everyone. 

How the Current System Operates in Practice

To get a comprehensive understanding of how users experience the courts, we reviewed 15 years of qualitative studies interviewing SRLs, including our own Cases Without Counsel study. Participants from this study will be quoted throughout this article to give a firsthand perspective of being an SRL. Additionally, we developed a user journey mapping framework for court high-volume cases. Four states conducted these journey mapping exercises with court users and professionals who work closely with them, and we synthesized the results. 

Across this research, consistent themes emerge about how SRLs experience the court system. While not exhaustive, these themes reflect a combination of urgent, preventable, and deeply structural issues. Together, they reveal a system that often assumes legal knowledge that most users in high-volume cases don’t have.

“I don’t understand what this means” 

A fundamental barrier for SRLs is the gap in substantive legal knowledge. Even when they use “plain language,” court forms, legal terminology, and procedural documents remain difficult for non-lawyers to interpret.

In practice, SRLs are expected to navigate statutes, court rules, and judicial decisions with a level of fluency developed through years of legal training, an expectation that is neither realistic nor equitable. From one self-represented participant’s perspective, “The whole system is really such an intellectualized system that it is very difficult to get it without having studied it. It really is like speaking another language.” As a result, many struggle to understand what is required of them, whether completing forms, interpreting court orders, or applying legal standards and evidentiary rules.

The consequences are significant, leading to repeated filing errors, rejected submissions, procedural missteps, and mounting frustration. What appears on the surface to be user error is often a symptom of a system design that fails to account for its primary users.

“I don’t know what to expect”

Beyond understanding legal content, SRLs face uncertainty about the process itself, what steps to take, what will happen next, and what is expected of them at each stage.

Research from IAALS’ Cases Without Counsel study highlights how frequently SRLs describe feeling “lost” or “in the dark.” This confusion operates at both the micro level (how to complete a specific task) and the macro level (how a case progresses from start to finish). Unclear forms and instructions compound this uncertainty, especially when litigants are unsure what information is relevant or how to present it. One interviewee stated how difficult the process is to navigate, “mainly because it is very overwhelming and parts of it can be really confusing if you’re not able to . . . get the gist of what they’re talking about.”

More critically, unfamiliarity with courtroom procedures place SRLs at a systemic disadvantage. In many cases, even when litigants can grasp the law, they are hindered by the many procedural hurdles involved with presenting their claims. The result is a system in which outcomes may be shaped as much by procedural fluency as by the merits of the case itself.

“I can’t find reliable help or information”

Available assistance or reliable information is often fragmented, difficult to access, or limited in scope. Attorneys may be financially out of reach, and court staff are constrained by ethical boundaries that prevent them from offering legal advice. As a result, litigants may be referred back and forth between the court and various pro bono organizations without ever receiving the help they need. Aside from advice, even getting accurate information about the process can be challenging. Information online is often outdated or incorrect.

In response to these access to justice challenges, courts have increasingly turned to technology as a solution. While digital tools have the potential to make the system more navigable, research shows they often introduce new barriers for SRLs when not designed with user needs in mind.

Studies such as Understanding and Improving the Experiences of Pro Se Litigants in the Trial Court of Massachusetts and Voices in the Civil Justice System demonstrate that many SRLs struggle to navigate online court resources. Litigants report difficulty locating accurate forms, understanding website structures, and determining whether they are accessing the correct information. As one SRL litigant explained, “It wasn’t self-evident; it wasn’t user-friendly or intuitive in any way to find the forms you were looking for and then to understand which ones you should be using.” Another described the court’s website as “messy . . . and hard to navigate.”

These challenges are compounded by disparities in digital access and literacy. Some SRLs lack reliable internet access, do not own computers, or rely on limited mobile data. Even when resources are technically available, they may not be practically accessible.

“I don’t have the time or resources to deal with this”

Court engagement requires a significant amount of time, money, and logistical coordination. SRLs find themselves struggling to balance work, childcare, and transportation. Even trying to access help is time-consuming and inefficient. “There’s a lot of research,” one SRL participant exclaimed. “It wasn’t, ‘Oh, I can browse and spend a couple hours tonight and do this’; it was hours and hours of research.”

According to the 2023 Access and Fairness Survey, court users were asked to report the types of accommodations they made to attend court. Overall, 52% of all court users reported making at least one accommodation to attend court; among non-attorney court users, that figure was higher at 63%. The most frequent accommodation reported among non-attorneys was taking time off work or school (41.2% of non-attorney court users). Taking time off work to handle your court case can create loss of employment, instability, isolation, and depletion of personal funds. 

“I feel outmatched and disadvantaged”

The system is built on the assumption that each party would be represented by well-trained attorneys who would surface the truth through an adversarial process. But we know that 75% of civil cases involve at least one unrepresented party. This new reality leaves SRLs to confront significant power imbalances when facing represented parties. Research from IAALS’ Cases Without Counsel shows many SRLs leave the courtroom feeling intimidated and outmatched by opposing counsel, while also struggling to organize and present their case effectively.

These challenges are not merely perceived. Judges themselves have acknowledged that gaps in substantive and procedural knowledge can directly affect case outcomes. “I think it can tremendously affect the outcome,” said one participating judge. “If I don’t get the information I need to make a decision, then it absolutely does,” said another participating judge. 

For some litigants, this imbalance where one party has legal representation and procedural expertise while the other must navigate a complex system alone becomes so pronounced that they disengage from the process altogether. One SRL participant recounted, “You make a lot of mistakes—and that’s part of why things have been coming out so wrong, because I made a lot of mistakes. And the court cuts you no slack. It’s to the point where I’m like, ‘I give up my rights’ because it’s so wrong.” 

Therefore, what emerges is not simply a contest between two parties, but a structural imbalance that can shape both participation and results.

Positioning the Problem

Taken together, these themes demonstrate that the barriers SRLs face are not merely individual shortcomings, but systemic design failures.

Research led by IAALS has been instrumental in identifying and elevating these user-centered challenges. By grounding reform efforts in the lived experiences of court users while drawing on broader empirical literature, IAALS is at the forefront of evidence-based and user-centered efforts to rethink how courts function in practice.

The question now is not whether SRLs can adapt to the system, but whether the system can be redesigned to better serve them.

Reforms Underway 

At IAALS, the goal is not merely to acknowledge the challenges facing SRLs but to actively design solutions grounded in their lived experiences. Drawing on direct input from litigants and stakeholders in Our Recommendations after Listening to the Litigants study, IAALS is helping lead a shift toward a more user-centered court system.

One area of focus is the expansion of self-help resources tailored specifically for SRLs. These include assigning trained navigators or liaisons to guide litigants through the process, improving awareness of available resources, and leveraging virtual tools to deliver assistance in more accessible and flexible ways. The aim is not just to provide information, but to ensure that support is understandable, timely, and usable.

IAALS also emphasizes process and procedural reform. This includes simplifying procedural steps and implementing triage-based case management systems that help direct litigants to the appropriate resources and pathways early in their case. By reducing unnecessary complexity, courts can better align their processes with the needs of the people using them.

Equally important is the role of judges and court staff. IAALS highlights the need for clear guidance and ongoing training to equip court personnel to effectively interact with and support SRLs, particularly in high-stakes areas like family law, debt collection, or eviction. A system designed for accessibility must also ensure that those administering it are prepared to meet users where they are.

Taken together, these reforms help design a system that supports SRLs as they navigate a complex system on their own.