The Hopeful Road Ahead
Reflections on the impact of government lawyering
Over the past three years, the American public has become collectively more fascinated with State Attorneys General than at any time in our country’s history. For many, litigation brought by State AGs has been the tip of the spear in the resistance against illegal and horrific policies implemented by President Trump. Among other things, these cases have sought to maintain the DACA program, uphold the Affordable Care Act, and halt the erosion of critical environmental standards. The lawsuits are a rallying point for broader social action. They are central in advancing (or at least maintaining) a progressive policy agenda at the federal level. And, for many, these cases are helping to keep the faith in our democracy.
I just finished an 11-year stint working for the Massachusetts Attorney General, and I had the privilege to assist with a number of these important federal cases. I saw up close the powerful advocacy and skilled case work of these public servants on issues ranging from reproductive health to student debt. Time after time, these teams answered the bell, pulled together a strong case on short notice, and fought like hell in the courts.
These cases are inspiring. They are necessary and impactful. But they are not the cases that give me the most hope for a better future. Instead, it is the daily interventions and regular case dockets — the assistance provided by lawyers, paralegals, and consumer specialists — which typically do not grab the national headlines, and sometimes are not litigation at all, that maintains my faith. These matters, and the advocacy performed, are exemplary of what government service should be.
For the past five years, I helmed a group dedicated both to enforcement of the laws as well as advocacy on behalf of individual constituents in the areas of civil rights, consumer protection, and worker rights. Aptly, it is named the Public Protection & Advocacy Bureau. We received hundreds of calls a day and thousands of constituent complaints each year. We helped workers secure a last paycheck that never came, consumers get credited by auto dealers for repair costs to hidden defects, and student borrowers obtain forgiveness on debts incurred at predatory for-profit schools.
The direct assistance was informed and enhanced by our investigatory efforts and enforcement actions. They worked hand-in-hand to forge a prolific social justice agenda with significant outcomes. Because of lack of access to affordable counsel, the extensive use of arbitration agreements, and the fact that many corporate abuses occur unknown to or undetected by consumers, our efforts were often the only ones to hold corporations accountable and vindicate critical individual rights.
Now I am joining a new team to bring the lessons of my experience at one of the country’s best public law firms to other state and local government enforcement offices around the country. The mission of the Public Right’s Project is to bridge the gap between the promise of our laws and their enforcement by supporting governments who operate closest to the community in developing this game-changing capacity. I am thrilled to continue the fight as the Legal Director of PRP.
Not enough government offices — particularly those at the municipal and county level — do affirmative rights enforcement work in a meaningful way. Many lack the resources and the technical experience to put these cases together. Others have not invested in critical community-based partnerships to connect with vulnerable groups in order to identify issues of concern or find individuals affected by problematic practices. Whatever the specific reasons for the current enforcement gap in any particular jurisdiction, now is a crucial time to make the case for state and local enforcement and push for more equitable action from these offices.
To my mind, the case is clear and overwhelming. For starters, enforcement cases offer the chance to get a clear win in support of constituents. Such outright victories are often hard to come by. The cases directly benefit those harmed by a predatory debt collection practice stopped or a discriminatory housing rental policy ended. The cases also connect to a broader message and value statement. They demonstrate — much like the highly publicized federal suits — a commitment to issues impacting the community at large such as environmental justice or a living wage. Doing the hard work of pulling cases together also opens alternative avenues to push for reforms and call out bad practices through the bully pulpit.
Over time, affirmative enforcement converts these offices into places where problems get solved. By cultivating that mentality as a matter of internal office culture and externally in terms of community expectation, these offices also become places that gain interest for partnerships and other creative initiatives with industry, the nonprofit sector, and beyond.
We are at a moment that is challenging faith in government. There are genuine questions about whether the government can continue to serve the community, rather than align with the interests of the few and the powerful.
My tenure in a State Attorney General’s office reinforced my belief that we must continue to see the possibility in government intervention. There is much work to be done to salvage that perspective. And we need to be committed to making this effort — at every level of government — over the long haul and no matter the results of the next national election.
The path ahead requires us to demand that the government serves as a stalwart advocate for the vulnerable and for righting wrongs. Doing so need not be partisan or divisive. It should instead reflect the truth that the government is regularly needed to rectify. Directing government to do this critical, and often unnoticed work, is the steady drum beat we need to restore our faith in our leaders and institutions and to make government, once again, a place that uplifts our communities.
