Page 122 - Impact: Collected Essays on Expanding Access to Justice

120
services providers? Given the political forces historically aligned against funding for legal services for poor and marginalized communities, it is likely that they would look for any argument, and any opportunity, to reduce the resources available to such providers .
Yet, at present, low- and moderate-income consumers face their legal problems without the benefit of legal assistance at an alarming rate . It is hard to tell them they should continue to go without some legal assistance, regardless of the form, because some other, potential beneficiaries of legal services might lose the assistance they might receive if services are expanded and broadened to reach a larger segment of the population . This is the classic ethical conundrum . Should many go without so that some can continue to receive a higher degree of service? Assuming that it is indeed a risk that attention to providing a lower “level” of service, provided in a digitized, commoditized form, to many will undercut the more traditional services that some receive, it is appropriate to debate the likely effect such attention will have, and to grapple with the best outcome: some for many or more for a few . Such a debate is worth having, but it should not get in the way of some degree of experimentation, i .e ., efforts that can help assess whether new modes of legal services delivery can help close the justice gap in meaningful ways, ways that might help meet the broader goal of access to justice .
Conclusion
The evolution of the American legal profession is likely about to embark on a new phase, one that will see new modes of service delivery that are technology-enabled, digitized, commoditized and atomized . This evolution holds out the promise that it might make legal services more affordable for moderate-income individuals and families and more obtainable for those of low income . The potential downsides, some of which are addressed here, are real, but they are also worth exploring, anticipating, discussing, and addressing . No fundamental shift in an industry and a profession is not without its risks . It is also possible that theorists like Christensen and Susskind are wrong: that disruptive innovation is not coming to the legal profession, and that the theory of disruption itself is not an accurate way to think about or look at sectoral change .21 Regardless of one’s views of Christensen’s theory of the ways in which disruptive innovation impacts markets, it is hard to argue with the idea that technology has transformed and is transforming the practice of law . What is more, those who can navigate these technological advances to make legal services more affordable will make great strides toward closing the justice gap .
The fundamental transformation of American journalism made possible by the internet and mobile technologies means both that the grip of traditional media has been weakened, while there has never been more access to information . Many can debate the benefits of this shift and whether it is better for the consumer of information and society in general . So, too, with the coming transformation of the legal profession . There are many risks, but there are also many potential benefits, like the possibility of improving access to justice in meaningful ways . Those interested in reducing the justice gap can manage change, or change can just happen, with unforeseen, and perhaps undesirable consequences . The more we discuss the risks associated with the change, the more we can address them, and this essay, and the essays in this volume, help to unleash, identify, explore, and assess appropriate ways to manage and harness change in beneficial ways that can improve and enhance access to justice for all Americans . •
21 For a critique of Christensen’s theories of disruptive innovation, see Jill Lepore, The Disruption Machine: What the Gospel of Innovation GetsWrong,The newyorker, June 23, 2014, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/23/ the-disruption-machine.
Impact: Collected Essays on Expanding Access to Justice