Public Interest Law & Policy

1. Public Interest Law & Policy Class 11 Ronald W. Staudt October 2, 2008

2. Big Day! • Sox v. Rays @ 1:30 • M.L.B v. S.L.J. @ 4 • Biden v. Palin @ 8 • Cubs V. Dodgers @ 8:30

3. M.L.B v. S.L.J - Themes • Learn some law • Today- due process, equal protection, right to counsel, poverty and parental rights and court fees on appeal • Study context of each case, exploring the controversy from various perspectives • political, social, economic… • Evaluate tactics and methods used by public interest lawyers • Is litigation an effective tool for social change? • Study how the lawsuits affected the lawyers themselves • Career trajectories, professional satisfaction, skill development…

4. M.L.B v. S.L.J. • “Age old problem of providing equal justice to the … poor and weak…” • Facts • Proceedings below • Introduction to the law discussion: the argument in the Supreme Court

5. Lines of cases • Griffin and Mayer –free transcripts on appeal of criminal convictions • Gideon and Scott -right to counsel

6. Lines of Cases • Boddie & Lindsay v. Normet- poverty & court fees -divorce & evictions • Kras and Ortwein- poverty & court fees bankruptcy and welfare. • Lassiter & Santosky—parental termination and procedural justice.

7. Access to judicial process test from Griffin line of cases • Character and intensity of the individual interest at stake V. • State’s justification for its exaction Here, compare M.L.B. to Mayer

8. General Rule on Poverty and State Fees • The State’s need for revenue to offset costs, in the mine run of cases, satisfies the rationality requirement. … • States are not forced by the Constitution to adjust all tolls to account for “disparity in material circumstances.”

9. Exceptions - • Right to vote-poll tax cases • Ballot access cases • Appeal Access • Serious crimes –Griffin • Crimes that carry no jail time -Mayer • Now--Parental termination cases - M.L.B.

10. Respondents argue • Government need not provide funds so that people can exercise even fundamental rights. • Lyng-food stamps on strike • Regan –tax deductions for lobbying • Harris v. McRae-Medicaid for medically necessary abortion • De Shaney –protection from child abuse • Washington v. Davis- neutral rule not invalid under Equal Protection analysis simply because of disparate impact on one race. (verbal skills test for employment) • But Williams v. Illinois- incarceration beyond sentence not permitted for failure to pay fine.

11. Terminations but not Custody? • In contrast to matters modifiable at the parties will or based on changed circumstances, termination adjudications involve the awesome authority of the State “to destroy permanently all legal recognition of the parental relationship.”

12. J. Thomas- Part 1 • Due process analysis shows no violation here. Hearing sufficient, appeal not required. • Washington v. Davis- no equal protection violation because indigency here only prevented M.L.B. from taking advantage of procedures above and beyond those required by the Constitution. • This is about discretionary appeals, not parental termination.

13. J. Thomas- Part 2 • Overrule Griffin • Restrict Griffin to criminal cases threatening incarceration • Confine Griffin to criminal cases