Justice Must Not Become Private Club Save It: For The Poor, Legal Services Is Their Only Hope

The conservatives who dominate Congress these days are really big on the Pledge of Allegiance. But their flag isn’t the one representing “justice for all.” No, when Newt and the boys place their manicured fingers on the lapels of those Brooks Brothers suits, they pledge allegiance to a flag that represents “justice for people like us.”

Other Americans need not apply. Under legislation approved by committees in both the House and Senate, no longer could the judicial branch of government be the one refuge where the humblest American can stand on an equal footing with the richest, seeking a redress of wrongs. By slashing and hamstringing legal services to the poor, Congress would make of the judicial branch what its water-carrying for corporate lobbyists is making of the legislative branch. A private club.

Even Richard Nixon would hold his nose, in the presence of an ideology like this. Nixon’s the one who created Legal Services Corp. Hired with federal, state and private funds, its lawyers specialize in concerns of the poor, such as domestic violence. This means fewer battered women have to go to court without a lawyer, or beg at the door of commercial law offices for someone to take their case for free.

It is true that Legal Services lawyers occasionally have been annoying. Most often they have annoyed the fortunate and the powerful who thought the law was a private playground, designed for their benefit. It is true there have been a few frivolous cases. Budget cuts, and rules imposed in the Reagan years, can limit these. Today, Legal Services screens cases so well that 85 percent of its claims settle even before they reach the courthouse.

Nevertheless, Congress proposes to kill Legal Services Corp., replace it with 50 new state bureaucracies and chain it with outrageous federal regulations. (Deregulation is only for the titans of Wall Street.) For example: No domestic relations cases. We wouldn’t want beaten wives challenging their husbands’ family values, would we? No more legal-aid outreach to Native Americans or migrant workers. No more cases asserting constitutional rights; they don’t apply to the weak, who need them most.

With services like these ruled out, what would remain?

Well, if some luckless old wino wanted to bequeath his paper bag to a pal, maybe the Newt Gingrich legal aid society could see its way clear to write him a will.

, DataTimes MEMO: For opposing view, see headline: Legal Services not serving well

The following fields overflowed: SUPCAT = COLUMN, EDITORIAL - From Both Sides CREDIT = John Webster/For the editorial board