Expert Analysis

• The Benefits Of Aligning States On Legal Paraprofessionals

  

  Texas' proposal to become the latest state to license paraprofessional providers of limited legal services could help firms expand their reach and improve access to justice, but consumers, attorneys and allied legal professionals would benefit even more if similar programs across the country become more uniform, says Michael Houlberg at the University of Denver.

• Court-Involved Supervised Release Shows Promising Results

  

  With questions about supervised release currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, the whole of our criminal justice system should look to a successful court-involved supervised release model created by U.S. District Judge Richard Berman, which provides a blueprint for improving reintegration outcomes post-incarceration, say Carrie Cohen and Savanna Leak at MoFo, and Marjorie Berman at Krantz & Berman.

• The Growing Role Of Wearable Health Tech In Criminal Probes

  

  The use of data from health-tracking devices such as Fitbits and Apple Watches as criminal evidence raises significant constitutional and reliability concerns, and practice tips for defense counsel include questioning the direct correlation between aberrant data and criminal behavior, say attorneys at Barclay Damon.

• 10 Years After Obergefell, Dignity Rights Hang In The Balance

  

  A decade after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, it's clear that the right to equal dignity remains a selectively granted privilege, a stratification that must change with a shift in American legal practice, says Iván Espinoza-Madrigal at Lawyers for Civil Rights.

• What A Federal Kidnapping Case Means For Recovery Agents

  

  A recent Eighth Circuit decision in U.S. v. Lozier reversing a ruling ordering a bounty hunter to face federal kidnapping charges, and ordering a new trial, raises pressing questions on the risks surrounding fugitive recovery and the balance between state and federal authority, says Ken Good at The Good Law Firm.

• 11th Circ. Ruling Shows How AEDPA Limits Habeas Relief

  

  The Eleventh Circuit's recent decision to uphold an Alabama man's death sentence reveals how the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act can prevent meaningful review and has eroded the power of habeas corpus petitions by forcing federal courts to pay extraordinary deference to state-level rulings, says Paul Shechtman at Yale Law School.

• Deterring Dubious Prosecutions Could Avoid Pardon Issues

  

  The controversial pardons by former President Joe Biden and President Donald Trump should spur a few key reforms to deter dubious prosecutions, ensuring that the legal system gets it right initially and earns the confidence of all Americans, say Marc Levin and Khalil Cumberbatch at the Council on Criminal Justice.

• Accountant-Owned Law Firms Could Blur Ethical Lines

  

  KPMG’s recent application to open a legal practice in Arizona represents the first overture by an accounting firm to take advantage of the state’s relaxed law firm ownership rules, but enforcing and supervising the practice of law by nonattorneys could prove particularly challenging, says Seth Laver at Goldberg Segalla.

• DC Circ. Cellphone Ruling Upends Law Enforcement Protocol

  

  The D.C. Circuit’s recent U.S. v. Brown decision, holding that forcibly requiring a defendant to unlock his cellphone with his fingerprint violated the Fifth Amendment, has significant implications for law enforcement, and may provide an opportunity for defense lawyers to suppress electronic evidence, says Sarah Sulkowski at Gelber & Santillo.

• How High Court May Rule In First Step Act Resentencing Case

  

  U.S. Supreme Court justices grappled with verb tenses and statutory intent in recent oral arguments in Hewitt v. U.S., a case involving an anomalous resentencing issue under the First Step Act, and though they may hold that the statute is unambiguous, they could also decide the case on narrow, practical grounds, say attorneys at Bracewell.

• Felon Juror Exclusion Rationales Don't Hold Up To Scrutiny

  

  After his felony conviction, President Donald Trump became one of 20 million-plus Americans who are banished from serving in our federal jury system, but the proffered justifications for excluding those with convictions from jury service are not supported by research, says James Binnall at California State University, Long Beach.

• Open Courtrooms Are Vital For Transparency And Public Trust

  

  Too often, public access to courtrooms is restricted without sufficient legal justification, and attorneys, judges and judicial oversight bodies must ensure courtrooms remain open to promote accountability and uphold constitutional principles, say Fordham Law graduate Olesya Lek and Parisa Djavaheri at Riza Realty.

• Why The Public Distrusts The Legal System, And How To Fix It

  

  Recent data shows that the public's attitudes toward the justice system and institutions in general are declining, but several reforms and practices could help restore public confidence, say Richard Gabriel and Michelle Rey LaRocca at the Trust in Justice Project.

• Responsible Use Of AI Could Bridge The Justice Gap

  

  The access to justice crisis continues to worsen in the U.S., but artificial intelligence has the potential to reverse this trend and close the justice gap if legal aid, court, pro bono, technology and law firm leaders work together, say Margaret Hagan at Stanford and Amy Groff at K&L Gates.

• 2 Ways To Boost Court Flexibility, Improve Appearance Rates

  

  Millions of people miss their court dates every year, leading to arrest warrants and snowballing consequences, but allowing for flexible scheduling and offering grace periods can promote appearance rates, improve court efficiency, and increase access to justice, say Shannon McAuliffe and Cameron French at ideas42.