The ongoing government shutdown has severely impacted defense attorneys working under the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) program, leaving many without pay for over four months. As the shutdown extends, these attorneys are facing financial challenges, exacerbated by the expiration of federal funding for the program well before the shutdown began.
Alex Riggins, a reporter from the San Diego Union-Tribune, discussed the funding crisis affecting local defense attorneys during a segment on KPBS Midday Edition. According to Riggins, the CJA program ensures that every defendant in a federal case is guaranteed the right to a defense attorney as mandated by the Sixth Amendment. In San Diego, the federal defenders typically handle about 50-60% of cases for defendants who cannot afford representation, with private attorneys stepping in for cases that cannot be accommodated due to conflicts of interest or other reasons.
Currently, about 120 CJA attorneys are dedicated to representing these defendants, many of whom are now resigning or refusing to take on new cases because they cannot afford to work without pay. The funding for the program ran out in July, prompting attorneys to submit vouchers in hopes they will receive back pay when funding is reinstated. Meanwhile, these attorneys often work on cases that can span years, building up significant hours of unpaid labor.
Adding to the strain, the lack of funding is affecting not just the attorneys, but also interpreters, investigators, and other essential support staff, who are also working without compensation. The impact of this financial strain has led many professionals in the legal system to seek alternative employment, further complicating the legal representation available to defendants. The situation raises serious concerns about the quality of defense that these individuals will receive and whether they will ultimately have access to necessary legal support.
As more attorneys leave the panel or pause their work, there is growing fear that defendants may not receive adequate representation. This could lead to delays and even dismissals of cases, as seen in similar funding crises. The Chief Justice of the Southern District of California highlighted the risks involved, raising alarms that the situation could necessitate the dismissal of cases if attorneys become too scarce.
Riggins pointed out that this funding issue is not just a short-term problem. If Congress reinstates funding at inadequate levels, the same crisis could occur again in the near future. Without a sustainable budget for defense services, the challenges surrounding the representation of vulnerable defendants are likely to continue, raising ethical and legal questions about the justice system’s ability to uphold constitutional rights.
Despite these challenges, many current and former defense attorneys express their commitment to providing representation, driven by a sense of duty toward the constitutional rights of defendants. Their resilience in the face of adversity showcases the importance of the legal profession in protecting individual rights, even as they navigate the difficult realities of working without pay. The hope remains that resolution will come soon to restore funding and stabilize the situation, allowing defense attorneys to continue their essential work.