Should Litigation Crowdfunding Replace Legal Aid?

Litigation crowdfunding has a number of key advantages over legal aid:

• There is no limit to the amount of litigation fees that can be crowdfunded, whereas legal aid has low limits in nearly all State systems and tends to be underfunded.


• Anyone who is an adult is eligible to crowdfund their case, whereas courts typically determine eligibility for legal aid, and it is typically only available for the very poor. Even the wealthy can crowdfund their case if they would like to externalize risk.


• Legal aid establishes a two-tier system, where the very rich can pay for the best lawyers, but those receiving legal aid typically have little or no choice as to counsel and do not always get the best. With litigation crowdfunding, litigants can select the best lawyer for their case.


• Legal aid is not available for all cases, since legal aid programs typically restrict the type of cases that can be paid for. Litigation crowdfunding is available for all cases with merit that appeal to the global community.


• Litigation crowdfunding is purely democratic, where the global community determines what cases should be funded. Legal aid is not, and courts and legal aid representatives decide which cases will be funded.


• In the same vein, legal aid is paternalistic, whereas litigation crowdfunding is not: litigants remain in full control of their case at all stages.


• Litigation crowdfunding costs nothing for society as a whole, whereas legal aid is typically funded by taxes. A considerable amount of the costs of legal aid in most systems go to funding bureaucracy rather than to actually funding the defense of legal rights.


• Litigation crowdfunding is a social experience: supporters become part of the legal team and share the ups and downs of a case. Legal aid is a largely solitary endeavor.

While there is a lot to be said for crowdfunding a case rather than relying upon legal aid, it is clear that legal aid continues to have an important role in society: only strong cases that appeal to the community will be crowdfunded, whereas legal aid will fund every case as long as the litigant and the case qualifies for legal aid, including cases that are certain to lose or which do not appeal to the community (it is difficult to imagine crowdfunding the defense of rapist, for instance).

Ultimately, litigation crowdfunding is thus complementary to legal aid. Both litigation crowdfunding and legal aid, however, are far better than litigation loans, where litigants can end up highly indebted regardless of whether they win their case.

– Invest4Justice

Should Litigation Crowdfunding Replace Legal Aid?