[ad_1]<\/p>\n
In summary<\/strong><\/p>\n In an effort to close the justice gap in civil disputes, the State Bar released two recommendations, and the bar is alarmingly off target. <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n There are two legal systems in California \u2013 one dispenses justice to those who can afford an attorney, the other steamrolls those who can\u2019t.\u00a0<\/p>\n In an effort to close the gap in civil disputes, the State Bar of California \u2013 the agency that licenses and regulates attorneys \u2013 recently released two recommendations. One would allow software companies to market tech platforms<\/a> for self-resolution of legal disputes such as divorce. The other would license a new category of legal paraprofessionals<\/a> with less legal training than attorneys or paralegals and allow them to practice law without attorney supervision, which is something paralegals can\u2019t do.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n After 15 years providing free legal services to clients with low incomes, I know the barriers to justice in California. I also know the pitfalls of allowing unregulated industries to exploit vulnerable Californians for profit. By inviting Californians to waste good money on bad legal services, the State Bar is dignifying a failure of justice we should all be fighting.<\/p>\n The State Bar is alarmingly off target because its recommendations ignore two of the biggest findings from its own \u201cJustice Gap\u201d study<\/a>. Most Californians don\u2019t know when a problem is a legal problem. And, many have concerns about the cost of legal representation. These are tremendous issues impacting our legal system, and they remain unaddressed by the State Bar.<\/p>\n