Browse the E-Library@NLADA.org
Click on the links to the index areas below to browse the library.
-
Top of Index
-
Civil Resources
-
Restrictions and Regulations
|
Aggressive Advocacy in Today's Program Environment
Remarks of Alan Houseman, Executive Director of the Center for Law and Social Policy, at the NLADA Litigation and Advocacy Directors Conference in Snowbird, Utah, June 23, 2002.
|
|
LSC vs. Velazquez, U.S. Supreme Court Opinion
Opinion of U.S. Supreme Court in LSC vs. Velazquez
|
|
LSC Program Letter 2001-03
LSC Program Letter 2001-03
|
|
January 10, 2001 Comments on the Proposed LSC Regulatory Review
Submitted by the Committee on Restrictions and Regulations Of the Civil Policy Group, National Legal Aid & Defender Association January 10, 2001. These comments are submitted to the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) by the Committee on Restrictions and Regulations, on behalf of the National Legal Aid and Defender Association's Civil Policy Group in response to LSC's request for public comment that were published in the Federal Register on November 24, 2000, (65 FR 70540), requesting input into a proposed review by the LSC Board of the LSC regulatory scheme.
|
|
Jan. 2001 Comments on the Proposed LSC Regulatory Review (1611 & 1636)
Submitted by the Committee on Restrictions and Regulations of the Civil Policy Group
National Legal Aid & Defender Association
January 10, 2001
These comments are submitted to the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) by the Committee on Restrictions and Regulations, on behalf of the National Legal Aid & Defender Association�s Civil Policy Group in response to LSC�s request for public comment that were published in the Federal Register on November 24, 2000, (65 FR 70540), requesting input into a proposed review by the LSC Board of the LSC regulatory scheme.
|
|
March 8, 2000 memo to LSC President John McKay re Issues for LSC Regulatory Reform
MEMORANDUM
TO: John McKay
FROM: Linda Perle and Alan Houseman
DATE: March 8, 2000
RE: Issues for LSC Regulatory Reform
We understand that the Legal Services Corporation is considering whether to revisit issues raised by the LSC regulations, particularly with respect to the administrative burdens that compliance with those regulations imposes on recipients. This memo attempts to outline some of the regulatory issues that we believe the Corporation should consider as it embarks on any such effort, and to state our views about which issues merit significant attention.
|
|
May 18, 2001 memo to LSC re Suggested Areas of Revision for Parts 1611 and 1626
MEMORANDUM
TO: LSC Regulations Review Task Force
FROM: Restrictions and Regulations Committee,
NLADA Civil Policy Group
DATE: May 18, 2001
RE: Suggested areas of revision for Parts 1611 and 1626
This memorandum is submitted to the LSC Regulations Review Task Force by the NLADA Civil Policy Group's Restrictions and Regulations Committee. The Committee has reviewed the current versions of Parts 1611 (Eligibility) and 1626 (Aliens) as well as the 1995 proposed revisions to Part 1611, and has identified numerous areas of both rules that we believe are in need of revision. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the LSC Task Force with the Committee's views of those issues that should be addressed in the rulemaking process that is now underway at LSC. Because it is very early in the process, we have not generally proposed specific language to be incorporated into the revisions, other than those provisions that are included in LSC's 1995 proposed revisions to Part 1611. However, the Committee does intend to consider specific recommended revisions and we are available to work with the LSC staff to develop proposed language at an appropriate time in the future.
|
|
Comments on the LSC Regulations Review Task Force Report
In response to the September 13, 2001 notice in the Federal Register, the National Legal Aid and Defender Association (NLADA) Civil Policy Group, through its Committee on Restrictions and Regulations (the Committee) is pleased to submit these comments to the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) regarding the Final Report of the Regulations Review Task Force (Report).
|
|
|