Political Interference with Clinical Legal Education: Denying Access to Justice

Essay by Peter A. Joy

Court rules in every state permit law students, under faculty supervision, to represent clients as part of clinical legal education programs. The success of students enrolled in the Tulane Environmental Law Clinic (TELC) in representing individuals and community groups led some politicians and business groups to engage in tactics aimed at depriving potential clinic clients from receiving law student representation. In an apparent capitulation to the demands of critics of the TELC and its clients, the Louisiana Supreme Court amended the student practice rule to limit the clients that clinical law students can represent and to interfere with clinical legal education at law schools in Louisiana. The author examines the process leading up to the amendments to the Louisiana student practice rule and evaluates the practical implications of the amendments on clinical legal education and potential clinic clients. The author also analyzes concerns about the judicial independence of an elected judiciary and explores access to the courts as a precondition for access to justice and the role of law school clinical programs in helping to make access to justice possible for some in our society. The author concludes with a call for the legal profession to institute reforms to inhibit future intrusions on student practice rules and clinical legal education in other states.


About the Author

Peter A. Joy. Professor and Director, Criminal Justice Clinic, Washington University School of Law.

Citation

74 Tul. L. Rev. 235 (1999)