My May 21, 2024 Amicus Brief in the 2nd Circuit on the lack of constitutionality of regulation of the practice of law in the State of New York by prohibiting free unlicensed legal advice to the poor and illiterate New Yorkers

 In a very interesting development, on May 20, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has allowed me, despite the suspension of my law license, of which the court is aware, to file an Amicus ("Friend of the Court) Brief with the court in support of Appellees in an appeal Upsolve, Inc. v. James, as an expert in several areas of law: consumer debt, constitutional, constitutional regulation of the practice of law, and criminal law

The Appellant in the case is the New York State Attorney General, and what she considered worth it to appeal and pour thousands upon thousands of dollars into, is the volunteer program meant to help the poor and the illiterate, predominantly black, New Yorkers, to fight a catastrophe created by attorneys licensed by the State of New York - attorneys for debt collectors.

Letitia James, instead of pouring the money she is wasting on this appeal into arranging legal assistance for those same poor and illiterate individuals, is threatening volunteers who are helping so much as to fill out the form available on the New York State website, this one, with criminal prosecution.

The amount of help that volunteers, guided by law professors in that particular area of law, are rendering that Letitia James is attacking is so much as to help people read the court-created form and to check boxes on that form, affirmative defenses, in order to help poor and illiterate New Yorkers avoid default when sued by predatory debt collectors.

I have filed the Amicus because I did not see in other Amicuses filed a straightforward analysis of unconstitutionality of the entire regulation system of the practice of law, since all other Amicuses were filed by licensed attorneys who were simply afraid to touch this issue, as well as the "mainstream" academia in the United States.

I am very surprised that the 2nd Circuit has allowed me to openly speak on this tabooed issue in an Amicus Brief.

I have very low hope that the 2nd Circuit will take my research reflected in the Amicus Brief into consideration since the 2nd Circuit is itself involved in the same type of regulation criticized in the brief, but the point of filing the brief was to make these ideas available to the academia, the public and to American lawyers.  Maybe, these ideas and this research will at least put some seeds of thought into people to move their thinking towards abolition of the unconstitutional scheme depriving people of access to justice.