Main Page: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
<h1>Arguments to Promote</h1> | <h1>Arguments to Promote</h1> | ||
* What [[access to justice]] really means? | * What [[access to justice]] really means? | ||
* [[Legal technology companies such as LegalZoom provide people with access to justice.]] | * [[Legal technology companies provide people with access to justice|Legal technology companies such as LegalZoom provide people with access to justice.]] | ||
* [[Non-lawyers can be legally required to comply with the ethical code of conduct.]] | * [[Non-lawyers can be legally required to comply with the ethical code of conduct.]] | ||
Revision as of 08:32, 14 July 2023
This wiki was setup to spread ideas that will bring about policy changes needed to solve the access to justice problem. We do so by debunking false arguments that have been used for the continued restrictions of the practice of law. We are also promoting new arguments that haven't been offered before to lift those restrictions.
If you want to help solve the access to justice problem, then you can do so by:
- Sharing these ideas with others.
- Adding content to this website. Send an e-mail to [email protected] if you need help doing so.
Arguments to Debunk
- Non-lawyers who practices law will harms consumers.
- A two-tiers legal system is bad for consumers.
- Non-lawyer owners will cause lawyer-employees to violate their ethical code of conduct.
- The access to justice problem is where indigents do not have attorney representation in court.