REGULATORY
SANDBOX
ALTERNATIVE
BUSINESS
STRUCTURES
ALLIED
LEGAL
PROS.
COMMUNITY-
BASED
MODELS

< Back to the Regulation Knowledge Center

These are currently the four most common regulatory reform models. It's important to note that these models overlap and intersect in various ways.

Regulatory Sandbox

A regulatory sandbox is a policy tool through which new models or services can be offered and tested to assess marketability and impact and inform future policymaking while maintaining consumer protection. It is risk-based regulation involving one or more regulatory models (e.g., ABSs, community-based models, etc.).

IAALS proposes a new system of regulation for legal service providers. The IAALS model of regulation envisions a non-profit, independent regulator of legal service providers implementing a risk-based approach to regulation that seeks to advance our regulatory objective: ensure consumers access to a well-developed, high-quality, innovative, and competitive market for legal services. Read more in our Independent Regulator of Legal Services Policy Outline.

Domestic

Implemented Programs:

Utah

Programs Being Implemented:

Indiana

Minnesota

Washington

Programs Under Consideration:

Illinois

Programs Not Moving Forward:

California

Florida

Virginia

International

Implemented Programs:

Alberta, Canada

British Columbia, Canada

Ontario, Canada

Manitoba, Canada

Nova Scotia, Canada

 

Alternative Business Structures

An alternative business structure, or ABS, is a business entity that includes people who aren't lawyers who have an economic interest or decision-making authority in a firm and provides legal services in accordance with local Supreme Court and ethics rules. This regulatory model is often referred to as entity-based regulation. It targets people of all income levels and businesses and involves changing or eliminating Model Rule of Professional Conduct 5.4.

Domestic 

Implemented Programs:

Utah

  • See the information listed in the "Regulatory Sandbox" section above.

Arizona

Programs Under Consideration:

Texas

Washington, D.C.

Litigation

International

Implemented Programs:

Australia

Canada

England & Wales

Programs Under Consideration:

New Zealand

 

Allied Legal Professionals

"Allied legal professionals" is the term IAALS uses to describe a tier of providers who are trained and certified to offer legal advice and services for certain case types. This is a market-based model that targets middle and low-income individuals and requires relaxation of/exemption or waiver of unauthorized practice of law (UPL) rules.

Domestic

See the IAALS Allied Legal Professionals Knowledge Center for the full landscape of programs in various stages throughout the country.

International

Implemented Programs:

British Columbia, Canada

  • Implemented through their innovation sandbox, see above

Ontario, Canada

Saskatchewan, Canada

 

Community-Based Justice Worker Models

Community-based justice worker models involve training and certifying individuals working at community-based organizations to offer legal advice and services in certain case types. These models target low-income individuals and require modification of/exemption from or waivers of UPL restrictions. Currently, existing projects like these are authorized through state supreme court Administrative Orders or the Utah Sandbox. Learn more about the diverse landscape of community-based justice worker models in this expert opinion and this webinar.

National Organizations Working in this Space:

< Back to the Regulation Knowledge Center

Implemented Programs:

Alaska

Arizona

Delaware

Hawaii

Montana

Utah (through its Sandbox)

Programs Under Consideration:

Illinois

Michigan

Texas

Litigation:

Currently, much of the litigation in the regulatory reform space centers around whether the unauthorized practice of law statutes in various states, which prohibit people who are not lawyers from providing legal advice, violate the first amendment. In this short video, Paul Sherman from The Institute for Justice discusses the history of the professional speech doctrine; and in this short video, Paul discusses the line between speech by lawyers that is fully protected by the first amendment and what is not protected by the first amendment.