Why Legal Profession
Law is a profession and an industry. In the United States, the world`s largest legal market, lawyers regulate both. The regulation of legal practice and transactions should be divided. Let lawyers regulate the practice and independent businessmen oversee the industry. Merging the two is detrimental to the profession, industry and society. Navigating an evolving legal system, technological advances, abundant case law and the demands of the legal profession create a stimulating intellectual environment for the lawyer. Lawyers and non-lawyers must deal with conceptually difficult issues, argue logically and clearly, analyze case law and legal law, explore complex legal issues, and master oral and written communication. Wilkins: You pointed out that the profession is more money-oriented and more competitive. Does this have anything to do with your decision to leave and become DC`s general counsel? Public schools? In recent years, the legal profession has grown dramatically. A steady increase in profits and revenues has increased the number of employees, and significant salary increases have created many job opportunities in various legal positions. The greatest barriers to accessing the legal system are its complexity and cost.33 Complexity requires staff trained to deal with it, and their time and that of other experts who support their work – forensic accountants, scientific and medical experts, etc.
– is expensive. Some blame the lawyers themselves for the complexity of the law, and there is probably some truth to that accusation. But the most likely cause is that a pluralistic and fragmented political system like that of the United States propagates multiple and contradictory laws and interpretations of those laws to satisfy the demands of interest groups. Legal procedures are plethoric to meet the capabilities and budgets of their largest end-users: commercial enterprises.34 The opposite system entails additional costs, since the investigation of the facts is left to the parties, their lawyers and their hired experts, and not to a neutral judge as in Europe. Litigation does not appear to have been costly in the 19th century, but it became even more so in the 20th century, although the actual processes in civil and criminal cases have almost disappeared. I had a very comfortable professional life in the same firm for 30 years. And suddenly, I found myself in a very different type of organization that wasn`t dedicated to practicing law, with very different people. As with federal legal services, the successes of these legal strategies on behalf of social movements inspired attempts to paralyze the lawyers and legal organizations that occupied them. In the civil rights era after Brown v. The Board of Education, the crème de la crème of the establishment in the South, worked with officials to obstruct public interest lawyers who had claimed to challenge racial segregation and protect protesters from arrest and prosecution.
States have demanded lists of NAACP members, accused attorneys in collective firms of ethical violations such as soliciting clients, and filed lawsuits.25 Most of these efforts were ultimately rejected by the Supreme Court, which established an exemption from anti-poaching rules for nonprofit public interest lawyers.26 In the age of civil liberties, Congresses and liberal judges have also created new paths. for private plaintiffs to enforce anti-discrimination laws. Often because of the incentive that their lawyers, if successful, can recover the legal costs of the losing side. Sandman: I had a stopover, and a very important one. The year after graduation, I worked for Judge Max Rosenn on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He was my first and most important mentor and role model as a lawyer – and a wonderful judge. He lived the life of a lawyer as a public citizen. From the beginning of my career, I had the chance to spend a year at the elbow of such a person from whom I was able to learn. A former Chief Justice of the Third Judicial Circuit, the great Edward Becker, once described Justice Rosenn as “a man of almost divine grace,” and rightly so. He was deeply involved in and revered by his community. He always gave something back.
He used his powers of analysis, expression and persuasion for the benefit of others. He showed me that kindness and generosity should never be incompatible with professional success. Since the day I finished articling in 1977, I wanted to be Max Rosenn. The exercise of this right consists in advising and representing clients as a general practitioner or in a law firm. In most countries, law graduates are required to complete some form of apprenticeship, join a professional organization, and obtain a bachelor`s degree. Over the past century, the legal professions, governments and not-for-profit providers have taken small partial steps to give people who otherwise could not afford access to legal process and advice. In this way, they came closer to the ideals of universal justice. They have also sometimes acted to restrict access to justice for the poor and powerless. Despite the inspiring rhetoric — and more inspiring models and examples — with which American lawyers trumpet their commitment to equal justice for all, they have generally served their own interests ahead of those of the public, especially the poor and economic hardship. They serve the rich and powerful better, serve certain clients and the interests of the middle class to the extent that they generate reasonable fees and, with a few notable exceptions, serve virtually everyone at all.
Each year, more than 45,000 law students in the United States take a mandatory course with professional responsibility. Despite its prevalence, the course is often considered dark and uninteresting, unsatisfactory for students and teachers. And since it`s typically a graduate-level course, students finish their first year with little to no foundation on the ethical principles that guide their profession and career choices. In the United States, subsidized counseling to help the poor deal with social and legal problems began in 1863 with the Working Women`s Protective Union in New York, which helped workers collect fraudulently withheld wages. The example of union gradually spread to other cities. The Chicago Protective Agency for Women and Children, which initially consisted primarily of non-legal volunteers, expanded the model. By 1905, it had paid staff and handled four thousand cases. The protection agency has also filed wage claims, but has specialized in helping victims of domestic violence, which have often been ignored by the courts. Around the same time, the Chicago Bureau of Justice was formed. His clients were mostly poor people with little debt to craftsmen, homeowners and mortgage lenders.
Like the protection agency, it was suspicious of the formal legal system: it viewed many judges as corrupt and inferior judicial staff as incompetent. The two Chicago organizations merged in 1905 to form the Legal Aid Society of Chicago.5 Some leading lawyers continued to promote legal aid, but the base remained apathetic and sometimes actively hostile.