News

Removing barriers for people returning from incarceration

Among the barriers faced by Philadelphia citizens returning from incarceration, unresolved traffic fines and driver’s license suspensions loom large.  Unless they’re addressed, these problems can impair the person’s ability to earn a living; and, because the underlying offenses typically date back many years, resolving them can be complicated.

Enter Justice Lab students Aaron Bindman, Zane Johnson, and Dennie Zastrow, who worked with their client, Philadelphia Lawyers for Social Equity, to develop solutions.  The team interviewed stakeholders in Philadelphia, surveyed returning citizens, and researched and spoke with individuals in other jurisdictions.  Their report, “Proposed solutions for Improving the Experience of Returning Citizens with the Philadelphia Traffic Division,” contains a number of common-sense proposals, including converting outstanding fines to time served or to community service; simplifying Traffic Division materials, and making sure that they include understandable information about the availability of payment plans for traffic fines; educating returning citizens on how to navigate the Traffic Division process; and more.

Aaron reflected on his work on the project: “It was not until we started talking to returning citizens that we began to understand the magnitude of these problems and the impact our work could have. Every potential employer we encountered required a non-suspended driver’s license, no matter the job. Impossible-to-pay traffic fines and resulting license suspensions were another unnecessary barrier to those individuals returning to society. Our Justice Lab project offers several solutions that could help returning citizens avoid being punished over and over again.”

Dramatizing immigration-services fraud

“I can help you qualify for a Green Card under the 10 year law!  … Look at all the people I work with [gesturing to the long line in the waiting room] — it’s because I know what I am doing!”

Those are lines from one of the skits developed by students in the Center’s Social Justice Lawyering Clinic — Michael Ahlert, Melissa Castillo, and Anika Forrest – who were looking for a way to educate immigrant communities about the widespread problem of legal services fraud. The students worked with Friends of Farmworkers, a Philly non-profit that has developed a special project on “Stopping Notario Fraud and the Unauthorized Practice of Law.”

“We wanted to do community outreach in some way that was engaging and different from the traditional lecture or PowerPoint,” Anika stated. And they did: the skits (in English and Spanish) are entertaining but also make serious points – only attorneys can give legal advice, don’t sign blank forms, ask for translation when you need it, and beware of promises that are too good to be true. The students performed the skits at the Northeast Regional Library, to audiences of ESL students from various countries (some of whom also joined in as actors).

“It was valuable to have a chance to think about how you actually empower communities,” Anika reflects. “We often assume that, once a law [such as the law prohibiting unauthorized practice of law] has been passed, the problem’s over.  But it’s important to engage communities in the implementation process.”  The Philadelphia School District and other immigrant-services organizations have asked for copies of the skits for use in their own training programs.

Helping unrepresented litigants navigate the courts

 

There was a time when most people who went to court over landlord-tenant problems, consumer disputes, child custody, and other such matters were accompanied by lawyers.  But that time is long gone; now, because of the shortage of even moderately-priced legal services, most Americans must represent themselves in these “routine” — but vitally important — matters.

But representing oneself is no picnic for a layperson, given the almost impenetrable complexity of legal rules and procedures. Students from the Sheller Center’s Social Justice Lawyering Clinic waded into this problem this year, working with the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas to find ways of making justice more accessible to pro se litigants.

Law student Madeline Rathey was on the team, focusing on the area of appeals from eviction orders.  “It was eye-opening, and frustrating, to try to figure out how to navigate the system, and then to simplify it for pro se folks,” she says.

Despite the frustrations, Madeline feels positively about documents that she and her colleagues drafted – including a much simplified form for people seeking waivers of court fees, and clearer information on how to get an eviction stayed pending appeal.  The team also recommended some changes to court procedure, such as elimination of the requirement that litigants submit a formal memorandum with every motion (a near-impossibility for pro se folks).  And, Madeline notes, an even bigger step forward would be the creation of a Help Desk at the court’s filing office – since most people sooner or later need some hands-on help, not just forms and instructions.

Madeline’s work on these problems won’t end here.  She graduated this spring, and her next stop is a position with Mid-Penn Legal Services in Reading, representing low-income clients in landlord/tenant cases.

Helping unrepresented litigants navigate the courts

 

There was a time when most people who went to court over landlord-tenant problems, consumer disputes, child custody, and other such matters were accompanied by lawyers.  But that time is long gone; now, because of the shortage of even moderately-priced legal services, most Americans must represent themselves in these “routine” — but vitally important — matters.

But representing oneself is no picnic for a layperson, given the almost impenetrable complexity of legal rules and procedures. Students from the Sheller Center’s Social Justice Lawyering Clinic waded into this problem this year, working with the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas to find ways of making justice more accessible to pro se litigants.

Law student Madeline Rathey was on the team, focusing on the area of appeals from eviction orders.  “It was eye-opening, and frustrating, to try to figure out how to navigate the system, and then to simplify it for pro se folks,” she says.

Despite the frustrations, Madeline feels positively about documents that she and her colleagues drafted – including a much simplified form for people seeking waivers of court fees, and clearer information on how to get an eviction stayed pending appeal.  The team also recommended some changes to court procedure, such as elimination of the requirement that litigants submit a formal memorandum with every motion (a near-impossibility for pro se folks).  And, Madeline notes, an even bigger step forward would be the creation of a Help Desk at the court’s filing office – since most people sooner or later need some hands-on help, not just forms and instructions.

Madeline’s work on these problems won’t end here.  She graduated this spring, and her next stop is a position with Mid-Penn Legal Services in Reading, representing low-income clients in landlord/tenant cases.

A legal incubator for Philadelphia?

Legal “incubators” help young lawyers gain the practical skills they need in order to set up moderately-priced law practices in local communities.  Thus, incubators serve a dual purpose:  they expand career options for law graduates, while also supporting the creation of affordable services for people of low and moderate incomes (who, studies show, are increasingly unable to access legal help).

The first incubator opened in 2007 at CUNY Law School.  Now, there are over fifty — in Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, New Jersey, Maryland, Ohio, as well as dozens of other locations around the country.  In an issue brief, “A Legal Incubator for Philadelphia?,” Temple law student Stephen Fox examines the incubator movement, and argues that the time has come to consider establishing an incubator here.

A thank-you to Emily Bock

emily_bock_temple_0Newly graduated and on her way to a judicial clerkship, Emily Bock was named a “Law Student of the Year” by National Jurist magazine for her work on a host of social justice causes — including a number of Sheller Center projects.  As a member of the Center’s Social Justice Lawyering Clinic, Emily co-authored Barriers to Justice: Limited English Proficient Individuals and Pennsylvania’s Minor Courts.  She represented low-wage workers in wage-theft cases.  She created the National Lawyers Guild Expungement Project, and worked with the Center’s Prof. Jennifer Lee to ensure that the project would continue after she graduated.  And she was the Center’s first-ever communications guru, helping us publicize the Center’s work via Facebook and the web.  Thank you, Emily!

 

Temple students offer strategies for addressing unsafe, unhealthy housing

Serious code violations — leaking roofs, broken windows, rodents, non-functioning heaters, lead paint, exposed wiring, and other unsafe conditions — are common in rental units across Philadelphia, according to Strategies to Address Unsafe and Unhealthy Housing in Philadelphia, a new report authored by Temple law students.   But, the report says, Philadelphia’s new city administration could make strategic changes that would create healthier and safer housing.

The report, prepared under the supervision of Nan Feyler, Visiting Professor of Law and the City’s former Deputy Commissioner for Public Health Programs, provides detailed recommendations for making sure that all landlords have up-to-date rental licenses; strengthening enforcement of the property maintenance code; taking a proactive approach to inspections, rather than waiting for formal complaints; and devoting more funds to the Department of Licensing & Inspections.

The report also describes effective approaches taken by Oakland, Boston, Rochester, and other cities with similar health and safety problems.  The students presented their report in a meeting with City officials on April 20th.

Finding time for some important questions

The students participating in the Sheller Center’s “practicum discussion series” this spring are all working in real-life legal settings –a women’s rights organization, a district attorney’s office, an immigrant services organization, a growing business, and others.  What happens when students have a chance to talk, across subject-matter lines, around some of the questions that confront new lawyers — especially those committed to social justice?

As it turns out, quite a lot.  Many of our conversations are about day-to-day problems, such as how to relate to clients and to supervisors.  Others involve larger themes, such as last week’s issue of how young lawyers can think about, and where necessary challenge, the “status quo’s” that they encounter in the world of legal practice.

Some of those status-quo’s — aspects of legal practice, that is, that don’t necessarily make sense but are accepted because “this is how it’s done” — involve how lawyers work together (or don’t). Others have to do with how clients are treated.  Still others involve laws and practices that result in systemic injustices.

We encourage students to question these practices.  So when one student saw unrepresented clients struggling to make sense of nearly-incomprehensible Family Court procedures, he came up with an idea for a chart that would help simplify things.  Another student was struck that the younger lawyers at the government agency where he works don’t last very long; perhaps, he reflected, some aspects of the work environment at the agency could be changed.  Another student wondered why, in immigration proceedings, single men seem to be at a disadvantage as compared to women and children – even though their legal claims are essentially identical.

Too often, students and new graduates are viewed as “baby lawyers.”  We don’t see it that way.  In our view, young lawyers have fresh insights and perspectives that our sometimes conservative profession badly needs.   Hopefully, our discussions are leading students to see themselves in that light too.

Successful advocacy makes families!

Successful advocacy makes families! On Friday March 11th, 3L Malcolm Ingram and Assistant Clinical Professor Sarah Katz successfully completed an adoption finalization for a client. Ms. M has been the primary caregiver for her godson, who has physical and intellectual disabilities, since he was an infant.  Her godson is now 12 years old, and now she is his legal parent!

Pictured areTLAO adoption Master Sante Reaves, Ms. M, Ms. M’s son, Malcolm Ingram 3L and Prof. Sarah Katz.

Immigrant families seek to join hearing on Berks Detention Center

A facility that was licensed (until recently) as a “child day treatment and residential facility” – but that actually operates as a jail, keeping families locked up and punishing them if they try to leave.  Children confined with adults other than their parents.   Inadequate medical care.   And an overall pattern, according to an Inquirer editorial, of “deplorable treatment.”

These are among conditions at the Berks County Residential Center, which houses immigrant families detained by the federal government.  Recently, the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services (DHS) revoked the facility’s license, but the county appealed and is continuing to operate the facility.

Now, the Sheller Center and its partners have filed a petition on behalf of some of the detained parents and children, asking to be heard when the appeal is considered.   “Our petition is an important symbol of the injustices faced by these detained families. It is essential that the voices and experiences of detained children and families be a part of the licensing appeal related to the Detention Center,” said Rhiannon DiClemente, a Temple 3L.

For more information, read the Petition to Intervene and recent news coverage.

UPDATE:   On April 5, the Administrative Law Judge overseeing the appeal denied our Petition to Intervene, on the ground that the families’ interest in the litigation “is adequately represented by the Department [of Human Services].”  We’re thinking about next steps.