In late July, in response to a forthcoming book arguing that anyone should be able to practice law, I wrote “Should Lawyers Need Law Licenses?” in which I conceded that there was no defensible argument for laws prohibiting the “unauthorized practice of law.”
A month later, The New York Times’ editorial page caught up with me. In a staff editorial entitled “Addressing the Justice Gap,” The Times advocated for the deregulation of the legal profession, arguing that such a move would enable low income Americans to obtain legal representation.
The Times is undoubtedly correct on this score. I stand by my original post. Unlike a doctor – whose malpractice might leave you maimed or paralyzed – legal malpractice generally only results in a financial injury or loss. Thus, were we to allow anyone to practice law so long as he carried sufficient malpractice insurance, consumers would not be harmed by the entry of lesser legal practitioners into the market.
It’s probably not something we’ll see in our lifetime. But that doesn’t mean the idea is wrong.

This blog in maintained by the Boston personal injury lawyers at The Law Office of Alan H. Crede, P.C.