Abstract
The American legal system has long struggled with the gap between those who can afford counsel and those who cannot, leaving millions of pro se litigants to navigate complex civil proceedings alone and lose at staggering rates. Yet, over decades of incremental reform, existing self-help infrastructure has failed to keep pace with the growing pro se crisis or the rapid technological advancement that now gives represented parties an unprecedented advantage. Meanwhile, law firms and attorneys increasingly harness law firm tailored AI programs that are generally unavailable to the unrepresented litigant. This technological asymmetry has transformed an already significant capability gap into a structural inequity that increasingly threatens the constitutional guarantee of meaningful access to justice. This Note argues that courts should affirmatively permit pro se litigants to use AI tools and expand state court-based self-help centers to provide attorneys to aid pro se litigants with any legal assistance they may need. Drawing on the Mathews v. Eldridge procedural due process framework, emerging AI platforms, and the documented failures of existing self-help infrastructure, this Note proposes a hybrid model that balances innovation with judicial integrity and brings the civil justice system closer to its constitutional promise of equal justice under law.
Recommended Citation
John W. Park,
FROM SELF-REPRESENTATION TO SMART REPRESENTATION: HOW AI & SELF-HELP SERVICES CAN STRENGTHEN PRO SE LITIGATION,
34 J. L. & Pol'y
265
(2026).
Available at:
https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol34/iss2/7
Included in
Civil Procedure Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Law and Society Commons, Legal Profession Commons, Litigation Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons