Hall, David 2015

Last modified: 2021-02-01 05:11
Storyteller: Hall, David
Interviewer: Houseman, Alan
Date of interview: 2015-05-07
Length: 0:48:10

Topics: Agricultural labor, Civil legal aid: General, civil rights, class actions, LSC: Restrictions, Mergers, Migrant labor, political access litigation, Undocumented immigrants, United Farm Workers union, Voting rights, and Water districts
Geo, US: Rural and TX
Lists:
Medium: Video
Collection:

NEJL I.D.: NEJL-009.089
Georgetown status: Video upon request
Georgetown notes: summary, bio note, keywords
Link to NEJL page: http://aspace.ll.georgetown.edu/public/repositories/2/archival_objects/350
NEJL AV link:

Video status:
Video notes:

Transcript link: Transcript
Transcript status: DeleteMeSoon
Transcript notes:

Consortium status: Gtn info copied
Consortium notes:

Excerpt:

Directed the Texas RioGrande Legal Aid for 42 years after starting his career with the United Farm Workers (UFW) in the Rio Grande Valley. National leader on migrant labor issues.



Bibliographic citation:

Abstract:

Description

Bio note

Longtime Texas RioGrande Legal Aid leader to retire


Texas RioGrande Legal Aid Executive Director David Hall will retire from his position after 42 years at the helm, the organization announced Wednesday.

“It has been my honor and privilege to work alongside colleagues and friends with such inspiring values, compassion, and dedication for justice,” Hall said in a statement to staff announcing his decision. “Siga la lucha.”

The Texas RioGrande Legal Aid Board of Directors plans to form a hiring committee to conduct a nationwide search for Hall’s successor, who will lead the nonprofit that provides free legal services to Southwest Texas residents who are unable to afford them.

“David and the people (has led) at TRLA are legendary in Texas colonias, barrios, and poor neighborhoods for their aggressive, fearless, first-rate lawyering for the most impoverished and oppressed Texans,” said John Henneberger, an affordable housing expert, in the organization’s statement. “He’s never shied away from a fight. He has cut a broad swath in Texas for longer than almost anyone else has been doing social justice work.”

Before joining TRLA in 1975, Hall was director of the South Texas Project of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation and a staff attorney for the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee. He was featured in the Texas Legal Legends project, created by 2008-2009 State Bar President Harper Estes to share the perspectives and stories of legendary Texas lawyers. Watch his interview here.

Full text of transcript

Consortium for the National Equal Justice Library
Oral History Collection
Interview with
David Hall
Conducted by Alan Houseman
May 7, 2015

Alan Houseman:
This is an oral history of David Hall, who’s the executive director of Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid. The interviewer is Alan Houseman for the National Equal Justice Library. Today is May 7, 2015.

Alan Houseman:
David, tell me a little about your background: where you grew up, where you went to law school, how you got into legal aid work?

David Hall:
I grew up in a middle class home in Baytown, Texas. That’s outside of Houston. Went to Robert E. Lee High School, which was right across the tracks from George Washington Carver High School. Perfectly segregated Southern background. My mother is from here in Travis County, and is of the first Anglo settlers in Travis County, so we go way back in Texas. I came up here to Austin, to the University of Texas undergraduate school in 1960, graduated in ’64, went to law school, got married, went to the Peace Corps in Venezuela, learned some Spanish. Got out, came back and finished up law school. My last year of law school I spent pestering the old regional office of OEO that was here in Austin about when they were going to get something called Texas Rural Legal Aid (TRLA) organized.

David Hall:
Jim DeAnda was the principal functionary for the TRLA at the time. He was trying to get it organized under the auspices of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, the plaintiffs bar. He was having a hard time. Mainly due to objections from the local bar associations in the Rio Grande Valley, in McAllen and Edinburg, that area. So that kept getting delayed. I graduated from law school still without a job. We had a kid in October, and I finally decided I needed to go to work.

David Hall:
So I got a call, referral, from that OEO regional office, from a guy named Antonio Orendain, who was one of the original founders of the United Farm Workers with Caesar Chavez, and Delores Huerta. He was trying to reorganize the UFW presence in the Valley after a strike in 1966, ’67 that was busted up by the Texas Rangers. He felt an overwhelming need to have a lawyer on the premises. So he called me up and I jumped at that opportunity, because he said he had $750 that would last three months and by then I was sure TRLA would be organized.

David Hall:
Well I moved my family down to McAllen. The $750 didn’t come through. So I spent the first few months on UFW stipend of expenses, which were not a lot, plus $5 a week. That got me going in the Valley. So I spent two and a half years with the union, the United Farm Workers. Then the ACLU national office decided that our project needed some major support. So they took it over and called it the South Texas Project of the ACLU Foundation. I was working under a guy named Burt Neuborne and Mel Wolf, who were at the ACLU at the time. They taught a lot of good law. So I spent my formative years working under their tutelage, made it to the high court two or three times. Argued a jury discrimination case up there in ’75, ’76-

Alan Houseman:
High court. Which court do you mean? Supreme Court or Texas, or?

David Hall:
The US.

Alan Houseman:
US Supreme Court.

David Hall:
The High Court.

Alan Houseman:
The High Court.

David Hall:
High Court, yes.

David Hall:
So and I had an interesting background starting out in the law. A lot of what I was doing in the early years was trying to provide the unions some breathing room. So there were a lot of criminal law questions, and issues, and trials, that kind of thing in those days. Plus doing affirmative litigation, a lot of political access litigation around access to water districts.

David Hall:
One of the phenomena along the border is something called colonias, unincorporated rural subdivisions that were the Valley’s answer to affordable housing. They typically lacked water, sewer infrastructure, drainage, anything related to water. One of the things we were trying to do is to open up these general purpose irrigation districts. We got the great idea of bringing — it was Neuborne’s idea — a due process case to open up the voting rights to people within the colonias so they could vote in these water district elections and put Mexican Americans on the district boards. Then convert them to general purpose districts that would provide water, and sewer, and some of those kinds of measures for the overwhelming Mexican American population in the Valley.

David Hall:
That was ultimately unsuccessful. We went to the High Court on both the due process exclusion of colonias pocket gerrymandering, and on one that weighted the vote by how much property you owned. Both were denied, affirmed adversely, by the US Supreme Court. That’s how growers managed to maintain control over those districts.

David Hall:
So I was doing that. I was also on the board of TRLA. Once it finally got organized I was on the original board. So by the time two executive directors had come and gone, I was the board chair, so they had to hire me as a new executive director. That was in 1975 and I haven’t done anything else since then.

Alan Houseman:
TRLA has been one of leading civil legal aid programs in the country, both in its farm worker work, and in its other work. Why don’t you talk a little bit about some of the early days of TRLA after you became director, and what you were trying to accomplish.

David Hall:
When I became director it was a 10 county program in South Texas, with about that many lawyers. We had some very small offices, one and two lawyer offices. The program had developed a reputation for some consumer work and that kind of thing. Because of my background in civil rights and labor law, and political litigation, voting rights litigation, we started moving more into those kinds of activities. The Legal Services Corporation was organized in ’74, ’75, about the time I became director. We got our first small migrant grant in 1976, I believe.

David Hall:
By 1980, by the end of the Carter Administration, we were a 49-county program and had a fairly large migrant component. About a third of our funding was migrant funding. So we really ramped up that effort and started litigating a lot of FLCRA cases — Farm Labor Contract and Registration Act cases. That’s the federal statute that provided some protection for the recruitment effort. It had a lot of problems with it. It was amended to become the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act with a lot more teeth in it. So that became the backbone of our migrant practice, doing litigation in those days mostly against local growers along the border.

David Hall:
The Rio Grande Valley, which is a four-county area in the Southern tip of Texas, was probably at the time the central repository for migrant labor in the country. Valley migrants would go literally from California to Maine. We spent a lot of time litigating cases against Texas growers. We finally got to the point where the local growers, the Texas growers, realized that it was probably not a good business practice to cut wages and violate the statutes that protected farm workers because they knew we’d go get them. It was much more costly in those days. We brought a lot of class actions because migrant workers tended to be large in numbers, short in duration was the employment. Everybody was subjected to retaliation if they brought claims. So if you bring a class action, only two or three people are vulnerable to retaliation. But you can have a major impact on a whole class of workers. So that was a high priority for us, and we really went after that work.

David Hall:
The other major effort in the late ’70s, early ’80s, particularly in the ’80s, was around political access litigation. A lot of redistricting of counties. Many of the counties in Texas hadn’t been redistricted in generations, decades. So they were particularly vulnerable to one person, one vote litigation. Texas counties are structured around four districts run by a county commissioner, and then there’s a county judge. Those five make up the commissioner’s court. So there was a lot of litigation in those early years around one person, one vote. The objective was to try to open up the political process to Mexican Americans who were by far and away the largest part of the population in South Texas.

David Hall:
At the time that I moved down to the Rio Grande Valley, in 1969, I think there was one, maybe two, Mexican American public officials in the county out of probably 150 public officials. Within a short period of time, certainly by 1975, we began to make some real changes in that direction. We were spreading that out all over South Texas. We were working a lot with the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund and Southwest Voter Registration Project. Then we branched out into single-member district litigation around school districts, and cities, and junior college districts, and basically revamped the political structure of local government in South Texas. There were many, many lawsuits filed, and a lot more that were just negotiated out.

Alan Houseman:
So, let’s say by 1980, how big was TRLA? How many offices, how many staff roughly?

David Hall:
By 1980 we had about 45, 47 lawyers covering 49 counties with probably 10 offices. That was certainly the high-water mark in terms of the size of the program and adequacy of funding until fairly recently, certainly since the mergers.

Alan Houseman:
Oh, we’ll get to that in a second. You may want to add some more of those earlier years, but during the ’80s funding from LSC went down and then slowly tried to creep up a little bit. IOLTA came into existence, and various funding sources came into existence. How would you describe what TRLA went through in the ’80s, and early ’90s, and the kind of advocacy that you did, or continue to do?

David Hall:
Well certainly in the ’80s we were continuing to do a lot of suits under the Voting Rights Act and farm labor litigation. We did some housing. There were a fair number of civil rights, police misconduct, employment discrimination, and low-wage worker cases that were brought in those days. At the time that the Reagan Board took over the Legal Services Corporation we were pretty aggressively engaged in class action litigation. I recall that, at the time that the restriction came out on class actions, we had I think 60 of them that we had to get out of. We sent a list to the Legal Services Corporation of what those cases were.

David Hall:
That was a huge adjustment. It particularly impacted in a very adverse way our farm labor practice. Of course as you will remember, it was the Farm Bureau and their allies that were much of the motivation for the attacks on Legal Services Corporation because they were feeling the pressure from that litigation, mainly, I think, because it was successful. Every time we brought one of those cases on behalf of a handful of workers it could make a difference with employers. So the effects of the restrictions in ’96 were really painful in terms of the quality of the advocacy.

David Hall:
So yeah, we took the big funding cut. The Corporation went after us, as you recall, on redistricting and passed regulation that wasn’t supported by a statute. We took that up to the D.C. Circuit and ultimately lost that on a two to one vote. Then the Congress got around to passing restrictions and included that one. We had done what we could to try to put the program in a posture to survive the ’80s. We thought it was an existential threat. So we created a foundation. We talked to a lawyer in D.C. named Tersh Boasberg who advised us on all that. We looked at ways that we might be able to survive a loss of all federal funding, which was the only money we had at the time, such as sliding fee scale arrangements with clients and everything else that we could think of.

David Hall:
The ’80s were tough, but the organized bar came to the rescue in a large measure. The IOLTA funding started to trickle in about that time. The diversification of funding certainly began in a big way in the mid ’80s to late ’80s. so that put us in a firmer posture for those kinds of political threats. By the time the ’90s rolled around, and the Clinton Administration, we were pretty well diversified. We were still doing as much as we possibly could within the limits of the restrictions that were put in place in ’96. But we were still able to attract some good lawyers and that kind of maintained the energy level at the program.

Alan Houseman:
One of the controversies that you faced, I think in the late ’90s, was over a case you brought the Val Verde case. I think it was in the late ’90s.

David Hall:
’96, yeah.

Alan Houseman:
So describe that a little bit.

David Hall:
Well ’96 was a general election year. We think the Republican Congressman that represented that 23rd Congressional District out in West Texas was the one. We think he rounded up a lot of people, about 900, who had been Air Force officers that had passed through Laughlin Air Force Base there in Del Rio, Val Verde County, at some point in their career. Some of them 20, 25 years earlier. But he got them to register as military voters, which was just fine with us as long as they voted only in the presidential and senatorial federal elections.

David Hall:
But they also all participated in the local elections. They had no standing to be registered voters in local elections, because they weren’t residents of Val Verde County. We saw that as a fairly blatant violation of the Voting Rights Act. It diluted one particularly commissioner’s court district. The Republicans had run a guy named Kekel, who worked on the Air Force base, and a sheriff’s candidate. Those two had won fairly close elections. We went into the federal court under the Voting Rights Act arguing that these votes should not have been allowed in local elections, and got a temporary restraining order. Then all hell broke loose.

David Hall:
The Republicans were particularly proud that they had elected, finally, somebody in one of those border counties. They’d been stalwartly Democratic for many years. They took umbrage that we were enforcing the voting rights of the local citizenry. It turned out that Mr. Kekel was still a long-term member of the Ku Klux Klan. Most of those military voters, not knowing anything about the district or who they were voting for, had no idea that’s who they were electing. So in the early course of the litigation one of our lawyers took his deposition — we had discovered him in full Klan regalia from an article published in the German magazine Der Stern — and confronted him with that after he had denied being a member of the clan. He admitted it.

David Hall:
So he ultimately withdrew as the commissioner. But we were forced out of the case. One of our lawyers in the case — I think it was the first case that was filed after the ’96 restriction came in, including the restriction on attorney’s fees — he had left an attorney’s fee claim in the case, it being a civil rights case. So the Corporation took that to be a violation and compelled us to withdraw. We got Dave Richards, who was formerly the governor’s husband, to take that case over. He litigated the rest of it. But we had to get out, and John McKay fined us the costs of our participation, which was maybe $15,000, which he then subsequently after a flood disaster in Del Rio gave back to us about a year later.

Alan Houseman:
You’ve been very active in farm worker issues over the years, including the efforts to get continued earmark funding and to create counts of farm workers that would be used to fund farm worker programs around the country. Also, TRLA is a major recipient of farm worker money. At one point, I think it’s in the 2000s but maybe earlier, you operated farm worker programs in a number of other states. Tell us a little bit about the history of the farm worker issues from your point of view, and how we got to where we are today?

David Hall:
Well, as I indicated earlier, the farm worker program is kind of a natural fit for TRLA because of the area that we covered. The initial funding was to cover the state, the entire state. In the late ’70s we put an office in Hereford Texas, which is up in the Texas Panhandle. We hired five lawyers for that office, all of them from Harvard, and they were well received by the population in Deaf Smith County. There was even a ballad of Deaf Smith County that was very popular on the radio at one time in the early ’80s about how TRLA needed to get out of town.

David Hall:
That office litigated a number of conditions lawsuits, housing lawsuits, wage and hour lawsuits, picketing rights lawsuits. We got sued along with the Texas Farm Workers Union up there at one point, removed that to the federal court, challenged the constitutionality of a bunch of the Texas labor statutes, picketing statutes, that were left over from the 1950s era, and got those knocked out. So we had a very active migrant program in offices in El Paso, the Panhandle, and the Valley, and all along the border.

David Hall:
That segued, in subsequent years, into a fairly significant role within the national farm worker community. We had a lot of the experience in farm worker litigation that we tried to make available to other programs around the country. We frequently had our very experienced paralegals, who knew not only Texas but Mexico, assist other programs around the country who had clients in our part of the world. Then we had a fairly significant role with the national migrant training efforts that have gone on over the years. Of course, our people were actively involved with the national backup center, the Migrant Legal Action Center, back in the days before it was severed from LSC. So yeah, we’ve been a robust member of the community I would think.

Alan Houseman:
There was some expansion of farm worker funding and you now have some programs in other states. Explain a little bit about that.

David Hall:
Well, when John McKay was president of LSC he got interested in migrant delivery issues. He was looking at a new count of farm workers, and wanting to look at what the delivery system looked like. He convened a conference in the town of Boerne, outside of San Antonio. That would have been ’97, maybe ’98, somewhere in that range. He was, I think at that point, already into his merger mode. He talked to programs about the fact that a lot of the migrant programs funded around the country were really small, without enough money to put on an effective program and really focus on the status of migrants. He thought that those programs should be consolidated as well. He initiated conversations with about half a dozen states in the Southeast. So that led to agreements between the project directors in those seven states — Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, and Kentucky — on creating the Southern Migrant Legal Services as a component of TRLA. A lot of those clients were based in Texas and would work in those states.

David Hall:
So we opened in an office in Nashville about 12 years ago. That’s been an exceptionally good office. Not just for us, but for farm workers. It’s really had an impact all over the South. I think the total amount of funding was $250,000 consolidating those six Southern states. Not nearly enough to operate effectively, but we’ve added, usually, a bunch of fellowships — EJW Fellows and Skadden Fellows — and supplemented it with some of our Texas money. They’re operating at about a $500,000 level now.

Alan Houseman:
At the moment there’s been a new count that LSC is working on, and some new considerations of migrant farm worker legal work. What do you see as the challenges ahead in the migrant farm worker arena today?

David Hall:
Well this migrant count is really going to distort the existing delivery system, is the biggest problem. Money is being taken from the established programs that have done most of the heavy lifting around the status issues — APA FLSA litigation, the housing conditions, labor camp access, all those kind of traditional migrant litigation amongst people who work in hand-harvest field labor. The money’s going to be diverted, it looks like, to a whole host of non-traditional ag labor, some of it established and not migrant. But the Corporation’s going to have to make some decisions about that.

David Hall:
I think the biggest question is going to be what to do about the delivery system itself. Does it make sense to put a 700% increase in migrant money into a state that has not had a migrant program and doesn’t see that many migrants? When they do see them they see them for only a very brief time. Those migrants are based elsewhere and then go from state to state. What I’m hoping we will see is more regionalization of the effort. I think the Southern Migrant Legal Services model is something that could be, and should be, emulated in other regions around the country to pull together a cohesive force of lawyers.

David Hall:
My experience is you need four or five good lawyers doing similar kind of migrant work in the same location. Because you feel isolated because of the clientele you’re working with, the types of work you’re doing. Having other people that are doing similar work and have the same passion and enthusiasm about it is critically important. You can’t get that if it’s diffused all over everywhere. It’s got to be concentrated and focus on the big ticket cases.

Alan Houseman:
At some point in the late 1990s or 2000, Texas consolidated a number of programs into three. Describe what happened and what programs became part of Texas Rio Grande?

David Hall:
Well I think at the time that McKay started on his mergers and acquisitions venture there were 10 programs in Texas. The urban programs were single-county programs. They tended to be dominated by local bar associations. I think one of the things that the merger effort was designed to do was to try to spread them into the larger regional programs and consolidate a number of those urban areas with rural areas. So when the Texas programs got together, and they were pretty much under the gun to merge from the Corporation, the big fight was over whether to have two programs, three programs, or four programs.

David Hall:
The Austin program wanted to be its own individual program. The rest of the state pretty much wanted to go with the three-program configuration. That’s what the Corporation bought into. There were five programs in the region that became Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid. There was: a Coastal Bend Legal Services program based in Corpus Christi that covered about 14 counties, including Webb County which had previously been its own program, Bexar County in San Antonio; Legal Aid of Central Texas covered Austin and about eight or nine counties around Austin; El Paso Legal Aid Society, a single-county program out in far West Texas; and then Texas Rio Grande which had the other 49 counties.

David Hall:
So the map divvied the area up in 68 counties in the southwestern part of the state. Three or four programs bid for that service area. It ultimately came down to a dispute between the Austin program and TRLA. LSC went with TRLA. We went through the merger throes for probably the two or three years it took to kind of work everything out. We consolidated the board. We set up our practice area delivery system as part of that effort. Texas Rural Legal Aid had had its own in-house case management system and was networked everywhere, with a wide-area network. So we extended that system into all five of the programs. As part of the effort to try to integrate those entities into one, we moved over to this practice area system where rather than looking at cases geographically, we divvied up into what is now ultimately about 40 different practice areas. A number are fairly low volume, but areas that are of critical importance to parts of the clientele. So that system has been very effective, I think, in putting together a cohesive whole of a program. I think now people in all of our offices see themselves as part of one program and pushing one agenda. But it wasn’t without its pain.

Alan Houseman:
So how large is TRLA, Texas Rural Legal Grande, now?

David Hall:
It’s Texas Rio Grande now. Austin and San Antonio decided they didn’t want to be rural, so we changed the name. It’s now 68 counties. The eligible client population is probably around three million. We’ve got 106 lawyers doing civil work, and we’ve got six that are doing public defender work. That’s a new effort we’ve undertaken over the last decade. We are looking to expand that, particularly into the rural counties in south Texas. Until the last big cuts from LSC in 2012 we were at 140 lawyers. Now we’re down to about 115 lawyers, 14 offices, 350 total staff.

Alan Houseman:
You won a number of awards within Texas and nationally. I just want to get a couple of those on the record since we’re doing your oral history. I’m going to start with two, and then if you want to add that’s fine. In 2011, you were at a White House event and received the Champion of Change award with a number of prominent legal aid people. From the ABA, you received the John Minor Wisdom Award. Why don’t you talk a little bit about both of those just to get it on the record?

David Hall:
Well the Champion of Change thing was certainly not for me. We had a medical-legal partnership out of our Brownsville Office. I guess it was the first one in the state. We hired a young lawyer who grew up in Brownsville, went to Yale undergraduate school, came back to the Valley and did Teach for America, then went to University of Texas Law School. I hired her right out of law school to come down and take over our medical-legal partnership, which had been running for about a year. The medical director, a woman named Dr. Marsha Griffin, is mother of one of our lawyers and an amazing advocate. She’s really locked into the national medical-legal partnership movement. So she was the one that was instrumental in hustling that award. They had to have a figurehead and I served in that role.

Alan Houseman:
I think that’s an understatement of your having a little something to do with the award. And the John Minor Wisdom Award from the ABA?

David Hall:
I’m not sure what that’s about. It’s litigation. Back in the day I used to appear in court rooms with some frequency. I haven’t been doing much of that in a while. But I did a fair amount of civil rights and employment litigation, particularly in the federal courts, so that may have had something to do with it.

Alan Houseman:
I think it probably did. Most of the people that have won that, Ralph Abascal for example, were prominent litigators who had a good litigation track record as lawyers and not as administrators-

David Hall:
Well one of the advantages of being an ED is you get credit for all that everybody else does. [Laughter]

Alan Houseman:
I see. You’ve won other awards — the Noble Award in Poverty Law from the State Bar of Texas, the University of Oregon Law School of Public Interest Public Service Program Award. Is any one of the awards you’ve won something that you’re really proud of, or unique to you?

David Hall:
Well, none of them are unique to me. Again, I think virtually every one of those is because of something that somebody else at TRLA did and I’m really proud of that. We’ve had some exceptional lawyers in this program over the years who’ve done some amazing work. I give you one example. About four years ago the State of Texas decided to do a mass child seizure from the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints that had a compound out in West Texas. The state brought in about 600 lawyers to represent the kids, the mothers, the dads, all these folks. TRLA contributed 14 lawyers to that effort. The 14 lawyers out-lawyered all 580 others that were there. They saw the need to get the case to the appellate courts and out of the local judiciary as soon as possible. They were representing 35 of the 50-some-odd mothers. They got into the third court of appeals after having habeas denied pro forma. They got into the third court of appeals within a week after the initial determination of neglect and abuse. They had a win in the Texas Supreme Court within a month after that. So it was some exceptionally good lawyering. Texas Lawyer Magazine described TLRA as the impact player of the year for that effort. Some of those kind of awards come from that kind of activity.

Alan Houseman:
Right. Well here’s my final question, you can expand it or not. As you look at where civil legal aid today is, generally and from your vantage point, what do you hope to see happen in the next years?

David Hall:
You mean other than five point one billion?

Alan Houseman:
Yeah, I would want that too. What would your vision be for civil legal aid, given who you are and your role as director of TRLA, one of the major programs in the country?

David Hall:
You know I think the LSC funded programs have been obviously the bulwark of the delivery system and have been horribly handicapped by the funding problems. There is an unlimited supply of quality lawyers out there willing to do this kind of work if the funding is available. It’s really a product of that that we have the issues that we do. I, for one, want to see more integration between the civil side of the docket and the criminal side. I think that what happens on the criminal side of the docket is a big contributing factor to poverty in this country. The front line of criminal defense is an excellent way of addressing poverty at one of its root causes. We are trying to expand in Texas on that side of the docket. I think the legislature right now is considering measures that will allow that to happen. I think it will happen. I think that’s one of the things that’s going to be important for the future of legal services in Texas.

David Hall:
I think civil legal services on its own has some huge hurdles that are unlikely to be overcome any time soon. I’m talking mainly about the restrictions that I know you have railed about in your career, and I have tried to sing some backup chorus from time to time. That to me is the most pernicious thing that our profession has allowed to continue. Why the leadership of the profession allows that to go on I’ve never understood.

Alan Houseman:
Okay. Is there any final words you have?

David Hall:
No final thoughts.

Alan Houseman:
Okay. Thank you very much, David.

David Hall:
You bet.