Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-30T07:12:11.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Funding the Cause: How Public Interest Law Organizations Fund Their Activities and Why It Matters for Social Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Catherine R. Albiston  and
Laura Beth Nielsen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most of the work of public interest law organizations does not make money. How do these organizations survive, given the economic realities of law practice? Drawing on survey data from a national random sample of public interest law firms, we investigate how funding models vary across public interest organizations and how funding sources affect these organizations’ activities. We find funding structures have, over time, shifted away from foundation support toward government grants. Compared to other organizations, however, conservative organizations draw significantly less of their budget from federal and state grants, and significantly more of their budget from private contributions. Conservative organizations are significantly less likely than other organizations to rely on funding that prohibits engaging in class actions, receiving attorney's fees, or lobbying. Respondents reported that funding restrictions hamper their ability to negotiate favorable settlements, bring about systemic change, and represent vulnerable client communities. We close with a comparative institutional analysis of different funding models.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , Winter 2014 , pp. 62 - 95
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abel, Richard 1985. Law Without Politics: Legal Aid Under Advanced Capitalism. ULCA Law Review 32:474–642.Google Scholar
Abel, Richard 2009. State, Market, Philanthropy, and Self‐Help as Legal Services Delivery Mechanisms. In Private Lawyers and the Public Interest: The Evolving Role of Pro Bono in the Legal Profession, ed. Granfield, R. and Mather, L., 295–307. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Albiston, Catherine R. 2011. The Dark Side of Litigation as a Social Movement Strategy. Iowa Law Review Bulletin 96:61–77.Google Scholar
Albiston, Catherine R., and Nielsen, Laura Beth 2007. The Procedural Attack on Civil Rights: The Empirical Reality of Buckhannon for the Private Attorney General. UCLA Law Review 54:1087–1134.Google Scholar
Alexander, V. D. 1998. Environmental Constraints and Organizational Strategies: Complexity, Conflict, and Coping in the Nonprofit Sector. In Private Action and the Public Good, ed. Powell, W. W. and Clemens, E. S., 272–290. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Aron, Nan 1989. Liberty and Justice for All: Public Interest Law in the 1980s and Beyond. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Boehm, K. F., and Flaherty, P. T. 1995. Why the Legal Services Corporation Must Be Abolished. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation.Google Scholar
Burke, T. F. 2002. Lawyers, Lawsuits and Legal Rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cappelletti, Mauro, Gordley, James, and Johnson, Earl 1975. Toward Equal Justice: A Comparative Study of Legal Aid in Modern Societies. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Press.Google Scholar
Carlin, Jerome E., Howard, Jan, and Messinger, Sheldon L. 1966. Civil Justice and the Poor: Issues for Sociological Research. Law & Society Review 1:9–90.Google Scholar
Covington, Sally 1997. Moving a Public Policy Agenda: The Strategic Philanthropy of Conservative Foundations. Washington, DC: National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy.Google Scholar
Cummings, Scott 2004. The Politics of Pro Bono. ULCA Law Review 51:1–149.Google Scholar
Cummings, Scott 2012. The Pursuit of Legal Rights—And Beyond. UCLA Law Review 59:506–549.Google Scholar
Davis, Martha F. 1995. Brutal Need: Lawyers and the Welfare Rights Movement, 1960–1973. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Decker, Jefferson 2009. The Conservative Legal Movement and American Government, 1971–1987. PhD diss., Department of History, Columbia University, New York, NY.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, Paul J., and Powell, Walter W. 1991. Introduction. In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, ed. Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul J., 1–38. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ford Foundation. 1976. Public Interest Law: Five Years Later. American Bar Association, Special Committee on Public Interest Practice. New York: Ford Foundation.Google Scholar
Freeman, A. D. 1982. Antidiscrimination Law: A Critical Review. In The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique, ed. Kairys, D., 96–116. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Freeman, A. D. 1998. Antidiscrimination Law from 1954 to 1989: Uncertainty, Contradiction, Rationalization, Denial. In The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique, 3rd ed., ed. Kairys, D., 285–311. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Hacker, Hans 2005. The Culture of Conservative Christian Litigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Handler, Joel F. 1978. Social Movements and the Legal System: A Theory of Law Reform and Social Change. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Handler, Joel F., Ginsberg, Betsy, and Snow, Arthur 1978. The Public Interest Law Industry. In Public Interest Law: An Economic and Institutional Analysis, ed. Weisbrod, Burton A., Handler, Joel F., and K. Komesar, Neil, 42–79. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Harrison, Gordon, and Jaffe, Sanford 1973. The Public Interest Law Firm: New Voices for New Constituencies. New York: Ford Foundation.Google Scholar
Heinz, John P., Paik, Anthony, and Southworth, Ann 2001. Lawyers for Conservative Causes: Clients, Ideology, and Social Distance. Law & Society Review 37 (1): 5–50.Google Scholar
Herschkoff, H., and Hollander, D. 2000. Rights into Action: Public Interest Litigation in the United States. In Many Roads to Justice: The Law‐Related Work of the Ford Foundation, ed. Golub, S. and McClymont, M., 89–126. New York: Ford Foundation.Google Scholar
Hilbink, Thomas M. 2004. “You Know the Type …”: Categories of Cause Lawyering. Law & Social Inquiry 29:657–698.Google Scholar
Houck, Oliver A. 1984. With Charity for All. Yale Law Journal 93:1415–1563.Google Scholar
Houseman, A. W. 2001. Civil Legal Assistance for Low‐Income Persons: Looking Back and Looking Forward. Fordham Urban Law Journal 29 (3): 1213–1243.Google Scholar
Houseman, A. W. 2002. Legal Aid History. In Poverty Law Manual for the New Lawyer, 18–25. Chicago, IL: Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law.Google Scholar
Houseman, A. W., and Perle, Linda E. 2007. Securing Equal Justice for All: A Brief History of Civil Legal Assistance in the United States. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy.Google Scholar
Institute for Educational Affairs. 1981. Perspectives on Public Interest Law. Foundation Officers Forum Occasional Papers, No. 2. New York: Institute for Educational Affairs.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J. Craig 1998. Channeling Social Protest: Foundation Patronage of Contemporary Social Movements. In Private Action and the Public Good, ed. Powell, W. W. and Clemens, E. S., 206–216. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Earl 1974. Justice and Reform: The Formative Years of the American Legal Services Program. New Brunswick, NJ: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Johnson, Earl 1999. Justice and Reform: A Quarter Century Later. In The Transformation of Legal Aid: Comparative and Historical Studies, ed. Regan, Francis, Paterson, Alan, Goriely, Tamara, and Fleming, Don, 9–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Olati 2012. Beyond the Private Attorney General: Equality Directives in American Law. Columbia Public Law & Legal Theory Working Papers, Paper 9204. http://lsr.nellco.org/columbia_pllt/9204 (accessed January 10, 2013).Google Scholar
Kessler, Mark 1990. Legal Mobilizations for Social Reform: Power and the Politics of Agenda Setting. Law & Society Review 24:121–143.Google Scholar
Kilwein, John 1999. The Decline of the Legal Services Corporation: “It's Ideological, Stupid!” In The Transformation of Legal Aid: Comparative and Historical Studies, ed. Regan, Francis, Paterson, Alan, Goriely, Tamara, and Fleming, Don, 41–64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klarman, M. J. 1994. How Brown Changed Race Relations: The Backlash Thesis. Journal of American History 81 (1): 81–118.Google Scholar
Luban, D. 2003. Taking Out the Adversary: The Assault on Progressive Public‐Interest Lawyers. California Law Review 91:209–246.Google Scholar
McCann, M. 1986. Taking Reform Seriously. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Menkel‐Meadow, Carrie 1998. The Causes of Cause Lawyering: Toward an Understanding of the Motivation and Commitment of Social Justice Lawyers. In Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities, ed. Sarat, Austin and Scheingold, Stuart, 31–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nagai, Althea K., Lerner, Robert, and Rothman, Stanley 1994. Giving for Social Change: Foundations, Public Policy, and the American Political Agenda. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Nelson, Robert 1988. Partners with Power: The Social Transformation of the Large Law Firm. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Robert, and Nielsen, Laura Beth 2000. Cops, Counsel and Entrepreneurs: Construction of the Role of Inside Counsel in Large Corporations. Law & Society Review 34:457–493.Google Scholar
Nielsen, Laura Beth, and Albiston, Catherine 2006. The Organization of Public Interest Practice: 1975–2004. North Carolina Law Review 84:1591–1622.Google Scholar
O'Connor, Karen, and Epstein, Lee 1984. Rebalancing the Scales of Justice. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 7:483–505.Google Scholar
Pierson, Paul 2000. Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. American Political Science Review 94:251–267.Google Scholar
Quigley, William P. 1998. The Demise of Law Reform and the Triumph of Legal Aid: Congress and the Legal Services Corporation from the 1960s through the 1990s. Saint Louis University Public Law Review 17:241–264.Google Scholar
Rhode, D. L. 2011. Access to Justice: An Agenda for Legal Education and Research. Report of the Stanford Consortium on Access to Justice, Center on the Legal Profession, Stanford Law School.Google Scholar
Rhode, D. R. 2008. Public Interest Law: The Movement at Midlife. Stanford Law Review 60:2027–2084.Google Scholar
Roelofs, J. 2003. Foundations and Public Policy: The Mask of Pluralism. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, G. N. 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sandefur, Rebecca L. 2007. Lawyers’ Pro Bono Service and American‐Style Civil Legal Assistance. Law & Society Review 41:79–112.Google Scholar
Sandefur, Rebecca L., and Smyth, Aaron C. 2011. Access Across America: First Report of the Civil Justice Infrastructure Mapping Project. Chicago, IL: American Bar Foundation.Google Scholar
Seron, Carroll 1996. The Business of Practicing Law: The Work Lives of Solo and Small‐Firm Attorneys. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Southworth, Ann 2005. Conservative Lawyers and the Contest over the Meaning of Public Interest Law. UCLA Law Review 52:1223–1278.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Norman 1998. The Prophet and the Bureaucrat: Positional Conflicts in Service Pro Bono Publico. Stanford Law Review 50:1395–1434.Google Scholar
Staggenborg, S. 1988. The Consequences of Professionalization and Formalization in the Pro‐Choice Movement. American Sociological Review 53:585–606.Google Scholar
Sutton, John R., Dobbin, Frank, Meyer, John W., and Scott, W. Richard 1994. The Legalization of the Workplace. American Journal of Sociology 99:944–971.Google Scholar
Teles, Steven M. 2008. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tushnet, M. 1984. An Essay on Rights. Texas Law Review 62 (8): 1363–1403.Google Scholar
Viguerie, Richard 1982. Defund the Left. New York Times, op‐ed article, August 11.Google Scholar
Zemans, F. K. 1983. Legal Mobilization: The Neglected Role of the Law in the Political System. American Political Science Review 77:690–703.Google Scholar

Cases Cited

Brown v. Board of Educ. of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kan., 347 U.S. 483 (1954).Google Scholar
Brown v. Legal Found. of Wash., 538 U.S. 216, 223 (2002).Google Scholar
Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972).Google Scholar
Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970).Google Scholar
Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244 (2003).Google Scholar
Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003).Google Scholar
Legal Aid Servs. of Ore. v. Legal Servs. Corp., 608 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2010).Google Scholar
Legal Servs. Corp. v. Velazquez, 531 U.S. 533 (2001).Google Scholar
Legal Aid Soc'y of Haw. (LASH) v. Legal Servs. Corp., 961 F. Supp. 1402 (D. Ha. 1997).Google Scholar
Legal Aid Soc'y of Haw. (LASH) v. Legal Servs. Corp., 980 F. Supp 1141 (D. Ha. 1997).Google Scholar
Legal Aid Soc'y of Haw. (LASH) v. Legal Servs. Corp., 145 F.3d 1017 (9th Cir 1998).Google Scholar
Lewis v. Lewis & Clark Marine, Inc., 531 U.S. 438 (2001).Google Scholar
NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415 (1963).Google Scholar
Phillips v. Washington Legal Found., 524 U.S. 156 (1998).Google Scholar
Reno v. Bossier Parish Sch. Bd., 528 U.S. 320 (2000).Google Scholar
Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819 (1995).Google Scholar
Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618 (1969).Google Scholar
Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972).Google Scholar
Sullivan v. DB Inv., Inc., 667 F.3d 273 (3d Cir. 2011).Google Scholar
Turner v. Rogers, 131 S. Ct. 2507 (2011).Google Scholar
United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000).Google Scholar

Statutes Cited

45 C.F.R. § 1610.8.Google Scholar
Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104‐134; 501–508, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996) (OCRAA).Google Scholar