How the Struggle to Afford Lawyers Affects Middle-Income Americans

This is the third in a series of analyses examining courts’ impact on the people they serve.

In television shows such as “Law & Order,” viewers often hear variations on the same refrain: “You have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.” But what does affordability mean in the context of legal representation? And who gets a free lawyer when they go to court? If you belong to the 52% of adults in the United States who are considered middle class, you almost certainly would not. 

People described as “above the line” or the “missing middle”—those who earn too much money to qualify for free legal services but not enough to afford private representation—often find that they must go into debt to hire an attorney or navigate legal problems alone, even when their home, child custody, or liberty is on the line. With housing, childcare, transportation, and other costs competing for limited resources, market-rate legal service, which averages $349 an hour, is often out of reach.

Across the U.S., law firms and legal aid entities have begun offering options such as limited scope representation, in which lawyers perform some but not all services related to a person’s case, to make legal counsel more attainable. Research on criminal and civil cases shows that legal representation increases the likelihood of obtaining protective orders, securing dismissals, lowering bail amounts, and reducing time in pretrial detention. But with legal deserts throughout the country, and with Americans experiencing 260 million criminal and civil legal problems a year, increasing access to lawyers offers only a partial solution.

The good news is that courts and policymakers can help minimize harmful consequences for people living “above the line” by building off-ramps for legal matters that may not need court oversight and simplifying processes for those that do require court intervention.

Priced out of legal help, the middle class is often left behind

Because courts generally do not collect income information from litigants, it is difficult to determine exactly how many court users are considered middle class. However, research shows that millions of middle-income households fall “above the line” or in the “missing middle.” With nearly a quarter of middle-income households living paycheck to paycheck, meaning that they spend more than 95% of their income on housing, groceries, childcare, transportation, and other necessities, private attorneys are often unaffordable. In 2024, 28% of households earning $60,000 to $100,000 per year did not have emergency savings to help weather unexpected expenses like hiring a lawyer.

In civil cases in which income information can be estimated, data shows that people who are sued for debt often fall “above the line.” For example, 82% of Minnesotans and 79% of Oregonians sued in debt cases are most likely ineligible for free legal help. Across the country, less than 4% of people being sued for debt have an attorney, while businesses that file these suits have nearly universal representation. Eviction and family court cases also frequently involve at least one party without a lawyer.

Representation gaps exist in criminal cases as well. Among states reporting 2025 data to the Court Statistics Project, around 1 in 10 felony cases in Connecticut and 1 in 20 felony cases in both New Mexico and Wisconsin involved people without an attorney. The reasons they did not have representation are unclear, but a study from Texas suggests that narrow financial eligibility requirements for court-appointed attorneys may lead people to go without representation when they fall “above the line.”

Complex court processes affect the financial and housing security of the middle class 

Going to court without legal assistance can have consequences that extend well beyond the case itself. In civil matters, people who lose debt collection lawsuits can see 25% of their paychecks garnished or their bank accounts wiped to $0 to pay down the judgment. In Colorado, an ambulance company’s billing error led to a court judgment and wage garnishment that left one family without power because it was unable to pay its electric bill. Research also shows that being evicted can negatively impact families’ health and well-being, as well as their housing stability, for years.

In criminal matters, individuals without attorneys may accept pleas without a full understanding of the rights they are waiving, their array of options, or the consequences of a criminal conviction. A 2011 study found that in Florida, two-thirds of people charged with a misdemeanor did not have an attorney at their initial appearance. Among those without a lawyer, 80%—compared with 63% of those who did have counsel—pleaded guilty or did not contest the charges. Regardless of whether counsel was present, most of the time, judges did not advise people facing charges of specific rights they were giving up: the right to confront witnesses, present a defense, or require the state to prove its case.

A plea to any criminal offense can lead to myriad consequences, including reduced earnings, an inability to obtain occupational licenses, and loss of the right to possess a firearm. Researchers found that misdemeanor convictions reduced annual earnings by $5,100 and felony convictions by $6,400. Further, because the average person living with a conviction is about 45 years old—with the most recent conviction 13 years in the past—this reduction in earnings coincides with typical peak earning years.

Courts can reduce the need for lawyers by creating off-ramps and simplifying legal processes

The middle-class struggle with accessing legal help is not insurmountable. Throughout the U.S., state leaders are implementing data-driven policies and programs that can help reduce the number of legal issues that end up before a judge—thus increasing the availability of existing lawyers for those most in need—and that simplify processes for cases that do end up in court. These include:

• Expanding diversion and declination efforts. Jurisdictions in at least 31 states have pretrial diversion programs. One such program open to people from all incomes is New York City’s Project Reset, which allows individuals charged with misdemeanors to attend counseling or restorative discussions in lieu of prosecution. An independent evaluation found that participants were four times less likely than nonparticipants to be convicted on a new arrest within a year and that their cases were resolved more quickly than they would have been in traditional court settings. Some district attorneys are also creating protocols to decline to prosecute certain low-level, nonviolent charges and focus limited resources on more serious offenses. Data from Boston shows that when prosecutors declined to charge individuals with nonviolent misdemeanors, those individuals were less likely to face future criminal complaints.
  
  For cases involving youth, Utah enacted a set of laws in 2017 that removed low-level, school-based offenses from juvenile court jurisdiction and allowed them to be handled by the school. The law also expanded other off-ramps, such as nonjudicial or pretrial diversions, along with crisis interventions to reduce prosecution. Reforms such as diverting cases from court can help families of all income levels, as well as reduce caseloads for overburdened court systems.
• Simplifying court processes to reduce unnecessary litigation. Alaska’s Early Resolution Program screens divorce and custody cases filed by unrepresented parties of all income levels and directs them to mediators or volunteer attorneys to help resolve issues early. An evaluation found that the program reduced by 39% the steps required to reach resolution and significantly shortened case processing times. And around the country, states are setting up text message reminders to help people stay engaged in their cases—a service that is particularly valuable for people who do not have an attorney to keep them apprised of court dates.

Together, these approaches can help ensure that legal outcomes do not depend on whether someone can afford an attorney. While such reforms help Americans across income levels, they can be especially valuable for middle-income households that do not have access to free support but also lack the disposable resources to hire lawyers and the tools to navigate the legal system on their own.

Casey Chiappetta works to advance The Pew Charitable Trusts’ efforts on court modernization and debt collection lawsuits, Ingrid Gillies conducts research on debt collection lawsuits and rural courts, and Darcy White leads research on policies and practices that can help courts better serve people.