CBA Record March-April 2026

THE YOUNG LAWYERS SECTION

arithmetic, there just simply aren’t enough lawyers to help, and the court system is designed for lawyers, not pro se litigants. Ultimately, the courts not only sit at the center of the civil justice system, they also set the rules for who may “practice law” and how “unauthorized practice” is defined and enforced. Most professions are regulated through agencies and boards that are at least formally political and publicly accountable. The legal pro fession, though, is regulated primarily through the judiciary and institutions run largely by lawyers. The rules that restrict nonlawyer assistance, often grouped under Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL) enforcement, are jus tified in the name of consumer protection. The problem is that the same rules, in the face of massive unmet need, also function as a rationing mechanism: The rules restrict the supply of lawful help in precisely the context where people most need some com petent assistance, even if it isn’t full representation. The most promising development to come out of the access-to justice world recently is the Community Justice Worker (CJW) movement. According to Frontline Justice, a nationwide orga nization promoting this concept, CJWs are “frontline legal helpers”: trusted community advocates, often the same people residents already turn to first, including shelter staff, faith leaders, and community health workers, who are trained and equipped to help their neighbors navigate everyday civil justice problems that lawyers, at scale, simply are not addressing. The core insight is that people don’t begin with “call a lawyer.” They begin with someone they trust and can connect with. The American Bar Association House of Delegates adopted Resolution 605 in August 2025 to address this issue. The resolu tion urges states and courts to study CJW programs that have been implemented in several jurisdictions and to adopt programs appropriate to their own jurisdictions to expand the accessibility, affordability, and quality of civil legal services for people who cannot afford an attorney, while still protecting clients and the public. The Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and the Confer ence of State Court Administrators (COSCA) also passed similar resolutions in July 2025. Last September, the Illinois Supreme Court approved, in concept, a new Community Justice Worker Program, with a public plan to be released by October 2026. CJW programs are responsive to the “justice gap” because they can unlock a massive influx of trained, supervised helpers to help people make sense of their legal problems. Most people do not need a full trial lawyer most of the time; they need help understanding notices, meeting deadlines, assembling documents, completing forms correctly, and showing up to court with a coher ent narrative and the right paperwork. That kind of assistance can be life-changing and system-stabilizing. It is precisely the kind of assistance that unauthorized practice rules tend to choke off unless it is delivered by (or tightly constrained under) lawyers. Community Justice Workers: A Movement to Meet the Moment

If the CJW project works, it could finally help fulfill the miss ing piece of a rights-respecting legal system. The ABA and CCJ/ COSCA resolutions are valuable here not just as endorsements, but as admissions: The institutions most responsible for regulat ing law practice are now conceding that meaningful access likely requires new, authorized roles in civil justice—roles designed for scale, built around trust, and evaluated in public. New Aims for the Legal Profession Illinois has reason to be proud of many access-to-justice innova tions, and the CJW movement is poised to be one of the most impactful. But if we are serious about fundamental rights, we need to be honest about scale and direction. A rights-grounded agenda would include at least three commitments: 1. Treat representation as infrastructure in high-stakes civil matters. Eviction, orders of protection, parent-child legal status, and other proceedings routinely implicate housing stability, safety, and family security. In addition to promoting CJWs, expanding right-to-counsel models and stable funding mechanisms is cru cial to expanding access. Programs like Cook County’s Early Res olution Program help show what it looks like when we increase the availability of lawyers at the right time in the process. 2. Design processes for all people, not only for lawyers. Plain-language forms, simplified procedures, and reliable legal information are not “dumbing down” the law. Rather, they make the law accessible to the people it is supposed to protect. For example, the work of the AOIC’s Statewide Forms Committee is unflashy and often difficult, but essential. 3. Use technology to increase access, not inequality. The legal profession is entering an era where AI is poised to revo lutionize the way we practice, for better or worse. If we deploy AI responsibly by using it to support frontline people who can bring to bear empathy, judgment, and care, we will avoid the darker fate of every pro se litigant coming to court with hallucination ridden pleadings and arguments. The American civil justice system often speaks the language of rights while operating like a rationed service. A natural-rights perspective highlights how this cannot be treated as normal. If rights are real and legitimate, if they attach to people and carry moral weight, then the ability to understand them, exercise them, and defend them in a public forum cannot be optional. Access to justice is not merely one good among many. It is the condition that makes the rest of our rights something more than rhetoric.

Andrew Sharp is the Founder/Executive Director at Legal Wellness Clinic and the Knowledge Strategy Manager at CARPLS Legal Aid, which is involved in Cook County’s Early Resolution Program.

CBA RECORD 25