Abstract
The rapid expansion of digital innovation (i.e., cloud computing, the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence (“AI”), blockchain, voice recognition, large language models (“LLM”), and other virtual and augmented reality) enhances the possibility of more pro bono lawyering and greater access to justice. At the same time, the presence of lawyers is even more important and threatened than in previous eras because of the proliferation of digital innovation. The current dilemma is exacerbated by the convergence of three phenomena: the continuation of under-resourced and disadvantaged clients needing pro bono transactional legal services, the ever-present capacity constraints of legal service providers, and the ease of access to a host of digital tools, some of which may enhance legal risks to the users.
From both a user’s and a provider’s perspective there are pros and cons to the use of digital innovation as a solution to address pro bono legal services. From a user’s perspective, digital innovation may provide underserved and disadvantaged businesses and organizations with additional, easy-to-access tools. For legal service providers, digital innovation can tailor and pinpoint the types of pro bono services needed by prospective clients and communities in their transactional service needs.
This essay advances the idea that providers of pro bono transactional services should confront digital innovation to enhance access to legal services. The hope is that this imperative measurably increases access to justice, educates providers and users, and provides client-centered services. In the face of concerns that legal service providers are either adopting digital innovation too fast or too slow, it is time to recognize that a significant “human” role is needed more than ever. Providers, who passively sit on the sidelines, are participants in generating unpredictable results to solve meaningful access to justice.
Recommended Citation
Patricia H. Lee,
Transactional Lawyering: Pro Bono Meets Digital Innovation,
70
St. Louis U. L.J.
(2026).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj/vol70/iss3/4