One would think that if poor and middle-income people cannot afford an attorney, they should have an option to obtain representation either from a non-lawyer who, by reason of experience or self-study, has practical expertise in a given area, or from a cost-efficient online form-preparation service. As a formal legal matter, however, those without a license to practice law in a particular jurisdiction are often barred by “unauthorized practice of law” (UPL) statutes or court rules from giving advice or representing individuals in legal matters in a whole host of situations. Notwithstanding evidence that the public desires, and in many cases would benefit from, such informal solutions, successful experience with lay representation before administrative agencies, and the fact that many people, often by necessity, must represent themselves in court proceedings, the organized bar prohibits any incursion into legal practice (as defined by the bar) by laypersons. UPL rules, which exist in every state, are most often enforced not by the executive branch or by private citizens claiming harm, but by state bar committees. The problems inherent in lawyers regulating their own competition are obvious and well documented. Yet these laws remain on the books and are actively enforced in most states.

UPL STATUTES AND ATTEMPTS TO DEFINE THE “PRACTICE OF LAW”

Many of the UPL statutes fail to offer a clear definition of the “practice of law.” Some jurisdictions offer no statutory or rule-based definition at all, relying on the courts to define the practice of law on a case-by-case basis, and essentially allow the state bar to control which practices are regulated through selective enforcement.