Main Page: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This wiki was setup to expose the errors behind arguments for the continued restrictions over the practice of law, and to promote arguments for the liberation of the practice of law. The goal is to spread ideas that will bring about policy changes needed to allow the private industry to solve the [[access to justice]] problem. | This wiki was setup to expose the errors behind arguments for the continued restrictions over the practice of law, and to promote arguments for the liberation of the practice of law. The goal is to spread ideas that will bring about policy changes needed to allow the private industry to solve the [[access to justice]] problem. | ||
Arguments are broken into two categories: Arguments to Debunk and Arguments to Promote. | |||
Arguments to Debunk are a list of common arguments given by proponent of continued restrictions over the practice of law. We debunk these arguments by exposing contradictions, arbitrary claims, and hidden false assumptions. | |||
Arguments to Promote are a list of new arguments that haven't been offered to push back on restrictions over the practice of law. | |||
<h1>Arguments to Debunk</h1> | |||
* Non-lawyers should not be allowed to practice law. | |||
* A two-tier 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. | |||
<h1>Arguments to Promote</h1> | |||
* What [[access to justice]] really means? | |||
* 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. | |||
Revision as of 20:20, 12 July 2023
This wiki was setup to expose the errors behind arguments for the continued restrictions over the practice of law, and to promote arguments for the liberation of the practice of law. The goal is to spread ideas that will bring about policy changes needed to allow the private industry to solve the access to justice problem.
Arguments are broken into two categories: Arguments to Debunk and Arguments to Promote.
Arguments to Debunk are a list of common arguments given by proponent of continued restrictions over the practice of law. We debunk these arguments by exposing contradictions, arbitrary claims, and hidden false assumptions.
Arguments to Promote are a list of new arguments that haven't been offered to push back on restrictions over the practice of law.
Arguments to Debunk
- Non-lawyers should not be allowed to practice law.
- A two-tier 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.
Arguments to Promote
- What access to justice really means?
- 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.