Momentum is growing for Congress to eliminate severe restrictions on legal aid programs that receive Legal Services Corporation (LSC) funds. LSC programs are currently prohibited from engaging in certain activities such as lobbying, participating in agency rulemaking, and bringing class-action lawsuits. The new congressional efforts come as reports show how the restrictions have harmed home foreclosure prevention efforts.

The LSC is a nonprofit corporation that provides grants to legal aid groups and is funded by Congress through direct appropriations. An appropriations rider containing special conditions has been attached to LSC funding and has been renewed annually since 1996.

On March 26, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) introduced the Civil Access to Justice Act of 2009 (S. 718) that ends the LSC restrictions on the use of non-federal funds, except those related to abortion litigation. "Lifting these restrictions allows individual states, cities and donors the ability to determine themselves how best to spend non-federal funds to ensure access to the courts," said Harkin. The bill also seeks to increase the LSC budget from $390 million to $750 million.

According to a Harkin press release, the Civil Access to Justice Act would remove "many of the restrictions currently placed on legal tools that LSC-funded attorneys can use to represent their clients. [. . .] In the spirit of compromise, the bill does maintain the prohibition on abortion related litigation as well as many of the limits on whom LSC-funded programs can represent, including undocumented immigrants (with limited exceptions such as victims of domestic violence), prisoners challenging prison conditions and people charged with illegal drug possession in public housing eviction proceedings." The measure would also create a program to expand law school clinics.

On April 7, the Brennan Center for Justice released a fact sheet that shows how the LSC restrictions harm foreclosure prevention efforts. Homeowners who are losing their homes to foreclosure are in need of legal help, yet the legal services available to them are limited and underfunded. The fact sheet details accounts of ordinary Americans and how the LSC restrictions have impacted homeowners in their struggle to keep their homes.

During this time of economic recession, there appears to be strong public support for legal services. Reportedly, two-thirds of those polled on behalf of the American Bar Association said they favor federal funding for people who need legal assistance.

A Washington Post editorial on March 14 went even further. It asked lawmakers to "unshackle Legal Services from congressionally-imposed restrictions that have kept it from working more efficiently and broadly." For example, unlike most others who represent plaintiffs, Legal Services lawyers who prevail in a civil case are prohibited from seeking legal fees from an opponent. The editorial also called for support of the Harkin bill.

A number of organizations also signed a joint letter that draws upon the current economic crisis to highlight the need to remove the restrictive appropriations rider. According to the letter, "Families and communities across the country are suffering because of the restrictions: victims of consumer fraud and illegal housing practices are placed at a disadvantage because LSC-funded attorneys cannot seek attorneys’ fees; efforts to help prisoners reenter society are needlessly postponed; communities are hamstrung in their ability to combat predatory lending practices because legal aid clients cannot participate in class actions; and those most knowledgeable about issues critical to low-income clients cannot engage themselves in legislative and administrative reform efforts."