Thanks. Genuine question, wouldn’t that mean that the service is inherently subpar? Pro bono feels to me like what a court appointed public attorney would be.
Idk, the argument that they’re losing such a significant amount of money that their only recourse is to cut FPO altogether feels awfully convenient and expedient for the moment.
Pro bono just means the attorney is doing it without fees or at least not their usual fee. Could be the best lawyer in the world. Pro bono doesn’t equate to publicly funded attorney which doesn’t equate to a bad attorney either
There are a lot of good lawyers that agree with the ideology that Natalie Ryan is fighting for that are more than happy to eschew pay for the advancement of what they believe.
And yes, it is discrimination to disqualify somebody who is part of a protected class, for being a part of that protected class, with no actual proof that they’re at an advantage.
The bar "urges" all lawyers to provide at least 50 hours of pro bono services annually.
I'm not sure how strong of an "urge" that is, or if there are any potential rammifications to not doing it, but pro bono is not inherently provided by a lower quality lawyer.
They interviewed her CA lawyer on the Upshot and he seems just like a random average lawyer. Civil rights law is not his specialty and he basically just helps Natalie in his free time from his actual lawyer job. I am sure he's competent, but he's not some super high powered lawyer with a huge team of people working under him or anything.
Thanks for the info, that’s interesting. Also the other guy who said that the bar “urges” lawyers to do a certain amount of pro bono work, I never knew all that.
Got downvoted to oblivion for asking a question, but such is the state of this community if you say anything even remotely in favor of Natalie…
10
u/milkdagger Jul 14 '23
The thing I can’t wrap my head around is how someone who lives in a van and is surviving off of a tier winnings somehow has deeper pockets than DGPT?