Pro Bono Pros and Cons
Remarks made earlier this month by Dennis Jacobs, chief judge of the New York City-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, riled up both our readers and Erwin Chemerinsky, law school dean at the University of California at Irvine. Jacobs told a Federalist Society gathering in a speech that “much of what we call legal work for the public interest is essentially self-serving” and that its result is often impact litigation that improperly expands the reach of the courts. In a subsequent National Law Journal editorial, Chemerinsky wrote that Jacobs should apologize for his “slap in the face” to those who volunteer hours each year for those who can’t afford the legal representation they need.
Are there valid points on both sides of this debate? And we’re wondering about your experiences with balancing pro bono work with your other obligations. What’s prompted you to take on pro bono cases? How does your law firm feel about pro bono? Did your interactions with and outcomes achieved for your pro bono clients convince you to keep at it, or leave you disillusioned?
Answer in the comments below.
Read last week’s question and answers about how the financial crisis is touching lawyers’ lives.
Our favorite answer from last week (and part of our inspiration for this week’s question):
Posted by Diana: “I am a solo employment attorney who usually represents the employees. While the number of legitimate cases that I will take has gone down significantly, I have seen double the number of people who call me to take on their discrimination cases pro bono. The callers no longer even pause before asking for me to work for free. Many of these callers assume that because I am a female attorney I will gladly work for free for the ‘single mom who supports her kids.’ For some reason the public thinks that attorneys get food, gas, rent, utilities, etc. free with their law license.”
Updated at 4:26 p.m. Oct. 23 to include a link to a transcript of Jacobs’ speech.
