2017 NLADA Annual Conference

Criminal records create barriers to employment, housing, and other basic needs and services. For immigrant clients, a criminal record may be even more damaging, as it can lead to immigration detention, mandatory deportation, and permanent lifetime banishment from the United States. Cleaning up someone's criminal record can provide a new lease on life, but clearing criminal records for non-citizens raises a host of issues with which advocates must be prepared to grapple. Filing record-clearing petitions can, at times, pose potential immigration risks that may outweigh the benefits. However, certain types of record-clearing mechanisms can actually help clients to obtain crucial immigration relief. With the recent changes in immigration enforcement priorities, it is more important than ever for advocates to understand the risks and rewards of clearing criminal records for non-citizen clients.

The language we use in our respective fields affects many aspects of our work: what we talk about or do not talk about both reflects and influences our values, goals, policies, resources, and daily tasks. A brief narrative analysis of the field of civil legal aid reveals significant discussion about income but much less about race. This colorblind approach, while understandably rooted in the language of our current legal and political systems, has significant drawbacks for both the external and internal efficacy of legal aid service providers. Failing to “talk about what we’re talking about” hinders providers’ understanding of the problem and their ability to address it. By not talking about race, legal aid providers risk ignoring the complex challenges facing their clients or, more broadly, the root causes for structural racial inequity. A race-conscious legal aid workplace would encourage a frank discussion of implicit bias and microaggressions, not only in client interactions but in the recruitment, hiring, mentoring, and promoting of employees. Making race part of the everyday language of legal aid service provision has the potential to make sure the most qualified people are leading, administering, or providing services in a way that most benefits the people desiring assistance. This session will draw upon the lessons of critical race theory and our current black liberation movement to present research findings and suggest concrete tools to bring the language of race into legal aid. The session will be highly interactive, involving pair and group exercises that analyze case studies and brainstorm solutions.

Advocate and client technology use have grown considerably in the last decade. Has your program's IT staff and budget matched that growth? Join us for a highly interactive conversation reflecting on answers to the following questions: What do we need to maintain good technology infrastructure in our organizations? How do we ensure staff are engaged and properly using our technology tools? How can we grow our use of technology as an organization in a way that advances advocacy? What are good models to use to make this all happen? What are the obstacles to implementing these plans, and what are some strategies to overcome those obstacles? Panelists and audience members will bring diverse viewpoints to the discussion, including small, medium, and large organizations; civil and criminal legal aid settings; and hiring in-house technologists vs. out-sourcing tech needs.

SESSION CANCELLED

We already know that expunging criminal records can be life-changing as no record is too old or too minor to pose a significant barrier to access to opportunities. To ensure that expungement services reach the communities that need it most, a new legal services model is needed: one that favors community-based clinics in the locations most familiar and safe to our clients. A community-based clinic model is built on pro bono help from law students and lawyers, the expertise of legal services staff, and, most importantly, community partnerships. By teaming with neighborhood associations, faith communities, and community colleges, we can reach people where they live and in a place that is emotionally safe. For young people, the clinic model may be the only way to truly reach a large percentage of those who need help. We will also talk about targeting the most needy communities by comparing arrest data to past legal services work in the relevant service area.

During this session, we will discuss representing clients with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (I/DD) in both the criminal and civil legal systems. Overall topics will include: an overview of disability culture and terminology, how to identify potential disability, effective communication with and accommodations for people with I/DD, ethical issues that may arise in representation, tips and strategies for working and communicating effectively with self-advocates, and the various pitfalls in our legal systems where those with I/DD can fall through the cracks. Participants will also have the opportunity to share their own experiences with representing clients with I/DD and brainstorm together about potential accommodations for future clients. Our goal is to have participants leave this session feeling more confident in their ability to work with clients with I/DD and to connect public defenders and legal services attorneys with disability advocacy organizations who can serve as a resource for them in the future.

Young, small, and/or female attorneys are disproportionately likely to encounter unprofessional and/or inappropriate behaviors by opposing counsel. This can include various forms of hazing, harassment, or sexual harassment. Staff may also encounter these types of behaviors by other actors in the court system (including judges, bailiffs, marshals, mediators, or clerks). Where they exist, we can also assume that unrepresented litigants are experiencing these actions. Panelists will define examples of common “bad behaviors” and review steps that should be taken to address them, including use of Judicial Canon 2.3 and Rule 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Across the country, youth and their families are charged for costs, fines, fees, and restitution in the juvenile justice system. Too often, these payment requirements push youth deeper into the justice system, cause families serious financial and emotional strain, and perpetuate racial and economic disparities. This presentation will provide an overview of the national picture of juvenile costs and fees as well as updates on legal and policy strategies that have been successful across the country against such costs. The presentation will begin with a brief overview of the field, including the research conducted by presenters from Juvenile Law Center and the Policy Advocacy Clinic at Berkeley Law on national fines and fees generally and the consequences of such fees. Facilitators will present information on recent reforms in California and Philadelphia and summarize current trends in juvenile cost and fees advocacy. After the overview of national practices and reform efforts, panelists, including a juvenile public defender from the Ohio Office of the Public Defender, will discuss effective defense strategies when representing clients facing costs and fees in the juvenile justice system. Panelists will provide sample motions and arguments, including Constitutional arguments, that may be used to advocate against such costs. The presentation will conclude with a large group discussion in which audience members can share information about the costs and fees juveniles face in their own jurisdictions as well as ideas for defense and reform strategies.

Imagine a world where it is illegal to sit down. Could you survive if there were no place you were allowed to fall asleep, to store your belongings, or to stand still? In communities across the nation, these harmless, unavoidable behaviors are treated as criminal activity for persons experiencing homelessness, often forcing them into health-threatening situations to avoid detection and creating arrest records that put further barriers between these individuals and the access to housing and services they need. Criminalization of homelessness has been condemned by domestic courts and international human rights monitors, and the federal government and a number of communities have demonstrated success in promoting and utilizing constructive alternatives approaches. This workshop will feature those with direct experience of criminalization, share examples of constructive alternative policies and the strategies used to achieve them, and provide specific legal tools for legal aid and defenders to use in advocacy in courtrooms and city council chambers.

We will never have enough lawyers to serve the legal needs of all low- and moderate-income individuals and families. A significant part of the access to justice toolkit must include self-help materials. In this interactive session, we shift beyond the basics of plain language and readability and focus on ensuring that individuals can successfully use those materials. We apply insights from the fields of design, psychology, public health, and marketing to develop a framework for how legal aid organizations, public defenders, law school clinics, and others might re-conceptualize the design and delivery of written legal information for clients and unrepresented individuals. We work through examples provided by the audience to reimagine plain language materials, looking specifically at: theories of self-affirmation and motivation; the look and feel—format, font, word choice; more than words—illustrations and cartoons; and design thinking and user feedback.

Legal services organizations around the country are engaging with digital technologies in new and exciting ways. From developing hands-on training programs for staff less comfortable with digital tools to conducting robust data analysis using public and proprietary data to classifying court documents with cutting-edge machine learning algorithms, our field’s use of technology is racing ahead. The great success of these efforts is multiplied when these ideas are shared, iterated upon, and improved by motivated lawyers and coders throughout the country. This workshop will use a series of “Lightning Talks” to encourage greater cross-pollination of technology ideas, resources, and projects. Presenters will offer brief explanations or demonstrations of projects and then lead an open discussion among attendees to build on the contributions of others.

Expungement and sealing of criminal records have become increasingly popular with state legislatures across the country, and they have been expanding eligibility. But there is another level to which record clearing can go: Automated sealing of cases, using technology in lieu of individual petitions. A Pennsylvania bill is pioneering "Clean Slate" with bipartisan support. Hundreds of thousands of cases may be sealed in this way, without requiring lawyers. Learn how the bill was drafted to make maximum use of the available technology and how the bipartisan and stakeholder support was generated. Possible adaptation of the automation concept to other legal areas will also be discussed with the audience.

Courts, legal service providers, and others in the justice community are increasingly adopting new technologies like machine learning, Big Data analytics, e-filing, automated triage, and on-line dispute resolution. New technologies always offer a mixture of risks and opportunities, but how do decision-makers cut through the hype they read in the press and the sales pitches they hear from vendors? This interactive session will start a conversation within the civil and defender communities about how we can inform and guide decision-makers so that these technologies are implemented in ways that protect the interests of our client populations. We will explore questions such as: How do we prevent software vendors from effectively setting policy within courts and government agencies? When does delegation of traditional court functions to vendors go too far? Promoting on-line dispute resolution has the potential for access to justice, but how can courts ensure that litigants still have a meaningful right to their day in court? When courts use AI to help litigants find information, how can they ensure the systems are providing high quality service? How far should legal aid organizations go in delegating tasks like triage and intake to technology? Court data may be "public information," but when it is available easily on the internet, scam artists can get to a defendant before the process server does. What should court clerks know about the dangers of public access systems?

Legal aid and public defender programs have operated for decades, helping low-income clients to resolve their legal concerns. Despite these efforts, the need for legal assistance has not diminished, while threats to funding continue. We must use our limited resources to improve delivery methods so as to reach a greater number of people with more efficiency and efficacy. This competence can be achieved through stronger partnerships between public defenders, civil legal aid providers, and social service agencies. Panelists from Rhode Island Legal Services and the Rhode Island Public Defender will describe their internal holistic programs as well as their growing collaboration. These services will be contrasted with those offered by Project Legal Link, an organization housed at Bay Area Legal Aid, which focuses on the role that non-legal advocates can play in helping clients to access the civil and criminal legal services needed to achieve overall success.

Immigrant children are affected by many of the areas of law served by both legal aid lawyers and public defenders. This session covers high impact advocacy that attorneys can provide for their child clients or children of their adult clients in conjunction with their primary legal issues that will help to bolster children’s stability and increase the impact of the primary advocacy for the client. Common legal areas where targeted additional advocacy can have great impact are housing, custody and guardianship, public benefits, and juvenile delinquency defense. The session will cover fundamentals of education law including the rights of homeless youth, enrollment, language access, and Child Find; obtaining Special Immigrant Juvenile predicate orders in conjunction with family court petitions or juvenile delinquency petitions; and strategies for assisting children in Office of Refugee Resettlement custody to obtain release.

As lawyers on the front lines, we bear witness to widespread injustices affecting our clients, many of which are not as visible to the broader public. This panel discussion will address the vital role, and significant potential of, using impact litigation to reverse these systemic issues and how to do so effectively from within a public defender or civil legal services office. The panelists will provide an overview of impact litigation models and how those models can benefit from and serve advocates and offices whose primary focus is direct representation. The workshop will address creating and developing internal capacity to pursue impact litigation, effective internal collaborations, and how to partner with external organizations and law firms when internal capacity is unavailable. Panelists will discuss best practices from two vantage points – advocates within legal aid and defender organizations and advocates at external partners with whom we may seek to collaborate.

The ADA requires that covered entities—including attorneys, the courts, and other private and public entities—not discriminate on the basis of disability and must provide effective communication when interacting with individuals with communication disabilities. This presentation will provide an overview of these protections and discuss practical considerations in working with clients with disabilities, especially communication disabilities. After the presentation, attendees will have a better understanding of how the law applies to them and of how they can best ensure that other private and public entities (e.g., courts) are following the ADA and providing their clients with effective communication as required under the law.