Confronting the Justice Gap: Maryland's Access to Justice Commission Convenes for Strategic Retreat
BY REENA SHAH, ESQ.
The Commission's Mandate
The Maryland Access to Justice Commission exists to break down barriers in the civil justice system to make it accessible, equitable and fair for all Marylanders, not just those who can afford it. Established to address the profound disparity between those who can secure legal representation and those who cannot, the Commission serves as both architect and advocate for systemic reforms that extend the reach of justice beyond the privileged few.
The Commission's work operates at the intersection of policy, practice, and principle. It convenes stakeholders across the legal ecosystem—judges, attorneys, legislators, community advocates, members of the bar and academia, and directly impacted individuals— to identify structural impediments to justice and craft solutions that are both pragmatic and transformative. In a state where civil
IN AN ERA WHEN THE INTEGRITY of civil justice systems faces unprecedented strain, the Maryland Access to Justice Commission has emerged as an essential bulwark against the forces of inequity that threaten to undermine the promise of equal protection under law. The Commission's recent board retreat represents not merely an administrative gathering, but a crucial deliberation on the future of legal accessibility in Maryland and the nation at large.
The retreat aimed to educate, empower, and energize commissioners while reconnecting them to the Commission's mission of making Maryland's civil justice system accessible, equitable, and fair for all residents.
legal needs vastly exceed available resources, the Commission functions as the strategic conscience of Maryland's justice system, ensuring that access remains not an aspiration but an actionable commitment.
A Gathering of Consequence
The Commission recently convened its Board of Commissioners for an in-person retreat, creating deliberate space for these appointed leaders to engage deeply with the precarious state of access to justice in Maryland and across the country. This was not a perfunctory assembly but an intensive examination of the challenges that continue to marginalize vulnerable populations from the legal system meant to protect them.
The retreat aimed to educate, empower, and energize commissioners while reconnecting them to the Commission's mission of making Maryland's civil justice system accessible, equitable, and fair for all residents.
Ward Coe, long-time chairman of the Commission, welcomed Commissioners, reminded them of the stakes to Marylanders when they do not receive legal help, and concluded by informing Commissioners of
NEARLY
40 % OF MARYLAND HOUSEHOLDS
(approximately 880,000 households)
CANNOT MEET BASIC NEEDS,
let alone afford legal representation.
his desire to step down as the Chair of the Commission. As the Commission works to find the best way to lead during these uncertain times, the loss of Ward's stalwart leadership, unflagging commitment, and unimpeachable guidance will be an additional challenge for the Commission to contend with as it will seek over the next few months to identify a new Chair.
Reena Shah, Executive Director of the Maryland Access to Justice Commission (A2JC) focused on the theme "Confronting Another A2J Crisis Together."
Shah presented stark statistics highlighting the civil justice gap in Maryland:
Nearly 40% of Maryland households (approximately 880,000 households) cannot meet basic needs, let alone afford legal representation
75% of low-income residents face at least one civil legal issue annually
While over 1.2 million Marylanders qualify for Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC) services, only about 20% receive help
In 2024, MLSC grantees assisted approximately 191,000 people, leaving roughly 759,000 low-income Marylanders without legal assistance
Shah emphasized that the A2JC, an independent entity powered by the Maryland State Bar Association (MSBA), does not provide direct legal representation. Rather than providing direct legal services, the Commission:
UNITES leaders across sectors
ELEVATES awareness about civil justice barriers
DRIVES systemic reforms and innovations
DELIVERS measurable results for vulnerable Marylanders
The Commission comprises 35 members with fixed and rotating seats, including representatives from legal services organizations, law firms, corporate counsel, legislators, nonlegal stakeholders, and the Governor's office.
Shah outlined the Commission's strategic plan built on four pillars: Coalitions, Advocacy, Reform, and Equity. Notable FY2025 accomplishments included:
Successfully advocating for passage of SB154, securing an additional year of $14 million in funding for the Access to Counsel in Evictions law
Tracking over 100 bills related to civil legal aid
Coordinating 15 weekly Advocacy Committee meetings
Publishing reports on access to counsel in evictions and innovations in tiered legal services
Shah highlighted ongoing projects across multiple committees focusing on civil legal aid funding, the impacts of federal policy changes, legal technology and AI for self-represented litigants, and fundraising to increase organizational capacity.
The retreat featured two keynote addresses that framed the Commission's mandate within both jurisprudential and economic contexts.
Keynotes from Key State Leaders Chief Justice Matthew J. Fader of the Supreme Court of Maryland delivered a comprehensive address structured around four critical dimensions of judicial engagement with the access crisis. He articulated his vision of the Judiciary's role in addressing access to justice. He outlined innovations the Judiciary is considering to lower procedural barriers and expand meaningful access for self-represented litigants. With particular urgency, Chief Justice Fader identified the unique access to justice challenges the Judiciary faces under the current climate, challenges that cannot await incremental response. Finally, he was open to exploring pathways for deeper engagement and partnership between the Judiciary and the Commission, recognizing that systemic challenges would benefit from collaborative solutions.
Comptroller Brooke E. Lierman, Maryland's first woman independently elected to a constitutional office, delivered a State of the State address on Maryland's economy, illuminating the fiscal landscape within which access-to-justice initiatives must operate and the economic consequences when legal systems fail vulnerable populations. Together, these addresses established the essential framework: access to justice is simultaneously a legal imperative, an economic necessity, and a measure of Maryland's commitment to equitable governance.
WHILE OVER
1.2 MILLION MARYLANDERS qualify for Maryland Legal Services Corporation (MLSC) services, ONLY ABOUT 20% RECEIVE HELP
Innovative Solutions to the Crisis
Angela Tripp, Program Officer for Technology at the Legal Services Corporation, delivered a forward-looking presentation on artificial intelligence's transformative potential for civil legal services. Drawing from survey data of over 450 legal aid organizations collected in April 2025, Tripp demonstrated that AI adoption in the access-to-justice sector is no longer theoretical—it is actively reshaping how legal services organizations operate and serve clients.
The Landscape of Crisis
The Civil Justice Crisis
Michelle Daugherty Siri, Executive Director of the Maryland Legal Services Corporation— the state's largest funder of civil legal aid— provided Commissioners with a briefing on the current status of funding, revealing the fiscal constraints within which legal services organizations must operate and the widening gap between available resources and documented need. The testimony painted a sobering portrait: millions of Marylanders navigate consequential legal matters— evictions, custody disputes, consumer fraud, domestic violence protections—without legal representation, often because they earn too much to qualify for legal aid but far too little to afford private counsel. This "justice gap" leaves individuals vulnerable to outcomes determined not by the merits of their cases but by their capacity to navigate byzantine procedural requirements without professional guidance. Siri shared that MLSC projected a decline in funds due to expected drops in federal interest rates, cuts in LSC funding and cuts to other federally funded block grant programs. She indicated that MLSC would provide One-Time Rescue Grants, capped at $50,000, which would not cover the losses to civil legal aid organizations, but would serve as some emergency assistance, during this challenging budgetary period.
The Commission also convened a distinguished panel of national experts whose work defines
the contemporary access-to-justice landscape.
Radhika Singh, Vice President of Civil Legal Services and Strategic Policy Initiatives at the National Legal Aid & Defender Association (NLADA), delivered what may have been the retreat's most sobering presentation: a systematic examination of the multiple threats facing civil legal services and civil legal aid funding. Among the most consequential challenges she identified was a proposed Department of Education rule that would limit the types of non-profit organizations qualifying as employers for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program—a change with potentially devastating implications for legal aid organizations' ability to recruit and retain attorneys. The proposed restriction threatens to undermine one of the few incentives that enables legal services organizations to compete with private sector compensation, potentially exacerbating the already acute shortage of civil legal aid attorneys serving low-income communities.
The Maryland Access to Justice Commission had moved with deliberate urgency, convening an open meeting to inform the access-tojustice community about the implications of the proposed Public Service Loan Forgiveness restrictions. The Commission encouraged individuals and organizations throughout Maryland to submit formal comments opposing the rule change, recognizing that federal policy decisions carry direct consequences for Maryland's capacity to staff its legal aid infrastructure.
Tripp showcased concrete implementations across multiple dimensions of legal aid work. She presented examples of AI applications in internal operations, legal research, and client communication, as well as direct consumerfacing tools that extend legal assistance beyond traditional service delivery models. Among the most compelling examples: the Legal Aid Society of Middle Tennessee and the Cumberlands' human-AI powered expungement form automation tool, which dramatically reduces the time required to prepare complex paperwork; Missouri's AI-driven triage system for legal aid intake, developed by Lemma Legal and Suffolk Law Lit Lab, which efficiently matches tenants with appropriate legal resources; and British Columbia's Beagle+ Legal Self-Help Chatbot, which provides accessible legal information directly to individuals navigating legal issues without representation.
Tripp also highlighted Maryland Legal Aid's own innovations, including MlaGPT—an in-house AI solution with robust privacy safeguards—and AI-assisted tools for intake referrals, brief drafting, and housing ledger review. These examples illustrated how legal services organizations can harness AI to amplify limited resources without compromising attorney judgment or client confidentiality.
Critically, Tripp emphasized that technological efficiency must never supersede the prioritization of justice. She outlined essential ethical considerations: the necessity of human review to ensure accuracy, stringent confidentiality protections, competency requirements for understanding AI tools' limitations, appropriate disclosure practices, and even consideration of technology's environmental costs. Her presentation underscored that responsible AI adoption requires clear policy guidelines,
comprehensive training protocols, and ongoing monitoring—principles that distinguish transformative innovation from reckless implementation.
James J. Sandman, President Emeritus of the Legal Services Corporation and Chair of IAALS' Executive Committee, brought decades of leadership perspective on the structural challenges confronting civil legal aid nationwide.
Sandman highlighted that the United States ranks 115th out of 140 countries on civil justice accessibility and affordability, and dead last (43rd) among wealthy nations. He indicated that in over 75% of state civil cases, at least one party lacks legal representation. The Legal Services Corporation reported that 92% of low-income people's civil legal needs received inadequate or no assistance in 2022—up 6 percentage points since 2017, despite a 31% funding increase. He argues the system has failed to adapt to a fundamental shift: it remains lawyer-centric despite operating in a world where most parties are unrepresented. Meanwhile, lawyers have shifted focus from individuals (who provided 54.2% of law firm revenue in 1973) to businesses (individuals now represent only 25.4% of revenue as of 2017).
Sandman frames this as fundamentally a market failure: "The market for legal services, though highly regulated, is catastrophically dysfunctional. Year after year, the market is unable to produce a supply of legal assistance that comes anywhere close to meeting demand. State governments have granted lawyers a monopoly over service provision, yet the suppliers consistently leave tens of millions of people without any service at all. This is bad regulation."
At the retreat, he encouraged Commissioners to focus on supply-side market-based solutions to increase the number of professionals who can assist with meeting the demand for civil legal services, including through the following:
Community Justice Workers:
He advocates for allowing community-based workers to be upskilled to provide legal advice and representation in narrow and high-need areas of law.
Legal Practitioners:
He advocates implementing changes like licensing competent, well-trained allied professionals to provide services currently restricted to lawyers, noting that Utah, Arizona, Oregon, Minnesota, and New Hampshire have already adopted such programs, but ensuring that these practitioners meet the access to justice gap.
(The Commission is currently working on the Innovations in Tiered Legal Services Task Force, which is a partnership between the Maryland Judiciary, Maryland State Bar Association, and Maryland Access to Justice Commission.)
The retreat examined how economic pressures, inadequate funding for civil legal services, systemic complexity, and technological barriers conspire to create what experts describe as a two-tiered justice system. For those with means, the law offers protection and recourse. For those without, it often presents an impenetrable labyrinth.
For those with means, the law offers protection and recourse.
For those without, it often presents an impenetrable labyrinth.
Toward Systemic Solutions
The Commission's work, as evidenced by this retreat, refuses the easy comfort of incremental adjustments. Instead, Commissioners grappled with fundamental questions: How can technology expand access without deepening digital divides? What institutional reforms might streamline processes for self-represented litigants? How can Maryland leverage innovative funding mechanisms to support civil legal aid? What role should the bar, the bench, and the legislature play in guaranteeing meaningful access?
IN OVER 75 %
OF STATE CIVIL CASES, at least one party
LACKS LEGAL REPRESENTATION
These are not abstract inquiries. They translate directly into whether a single parent facing eviction can remain housed, whether a survivor of domestic violence can secure a protective order, or whether an elderly resident can prevent financial exploitation. The Commission recognizes that access to justice is not ancillary to human flourishing— it is foundational.
The Path Forward
As the retreat concluded, the Commissioners left with renewed understanding of both the urgency and complexity of their charge. The conversations initiated during this convening will inform strategic priorities for the Commission and also empower each Commissioner to become an active ambassador to become a solution partner in the face of another access to justice crisis.
The Maryland Access to Justice Commission operates with the understanding that a justice system that serves only those who can afford it is no justice system at all. It is, instead, a mechanism of privilege maintenance—one fundamentally at odds with democratic principles and constitutional promises. The Commission's recent retreat represents a recommitment to the arduous, essential work of making those promises real for all Marylanders, regardless of their economic circumstances.
In the months ahead, the Commission will continue to serve as convener, catalyst, and conscience for Maryland's civil justice system. The insights gained and relationships strengthened during this retreat will prove instrumental in confronting the justice gap— not with platitudes, but with policy; not with resignation, but with resolve.