
‘How do you negotiate with that?' Mass. lawmakers cut a proposed pay hike for court-appointed attorneys amid work stoppage.
'It doesn't give bar advocates confidence that [lawmakers] appreciate the crisis that is going on,' said Jennifer O'Brien, a criminal defense attorney in Billerica who is among those who've stopped taking bar advocate cases. 'We definitely want to go back to work. We want a resolution. But when you get zero raises, how do you negotiate with that?'
The work stoppage that began May 27 has hit Suffolk and Middlesex counties the hardest, but lawyers say it has spread to courthouses elsewhere.
As of Monday, more than 1,460 defendants — including 107 who are in custody — didn't have counsel across the state, according to a count provided by the Committee for Public Counsel Services, the state's public defenders office. That included a Boston Police Department sergeant who was
Advertisement
CPCS has
The bar advocates who work in district courts, the base level of the criminal court system, are paid $65 an hour. In superior court, where most felonies are prosecuted, they make $85. Attorneys who handle homicide cases make $120 an hour.
In comparison, in Rhode Island, which this year increased its pay, court-appointed lawyers for most cases make $112 an hour. In New Hampshire, court-appointed attorneys make $125 or $150 an hour, and in Maine, it's $150 across the board.
The proposal that Massachusetts lawmakers ultimately cut from the budget offered more modest changes than what attorneys in Massachusetts had sought. The measure, which passed the Senate last month, would have raised the rates for those working in superior court and taking appointments for mental-health matters. Those handling homicide cases would have their hourly rates increase, too, from $120 to $130.
But lawmakers ultimately dropped it from the budget plan amid closed-door negotiations between House and Senate leaders.
That change alone likely would not have brought many attorneys back to courthouses, but it would have been a 'step in the right direction,' said Mara Dolan, a member of the Governor's Council who also serves as a defense attorney.
Advertisement
Instead, she said, 'we've had no step at all. Any positive indicator would have helped. But are there folks who would not come back unless there was a substantial raise? Absolutely.'
Senate President Karen E. Spilka said Monday that legislative leaders ultimately cut several proposals, including hundreds of millions of dollars in spending, that they had approved in their earlier budget plans.
The Ashland Democrat said the spending plan still includes money to cover the bar advocates' current rates — 'They are getting paid for their cases,' she said — but she acknowledged this was a 'tough budget.'
'Hard decisions had to be made,' Spilka said. 'But I look forward to talking to the bar advocates directly to hear what their issues are.'
Lisa Hewitt, general counsel for CPCS, told staff in an e-mail Monday that while lawmakers didn't adopt the language, leaders at the public defender's office believe lawmakers are paying attention to the crisis 'and will take action.'
That said, the budget plan included other disappointing news for the agency, she wrote. Lawmakers approved giving CPCS $89 million for its operations, which is 'well below our requested maintenance level,' Hewitt wrote.
The agency also received about $25 million to cover costs for representing indigent clients and $213.8 million to pay private attorneys, both of which fall below the office's projected spending for the year, she said.
'Without additional legislative action, these appropriation levels will have serious consequences for both staff and private bar compensation and will impact all components of our legal services delivery system,' Hewitt wrote.
Advertisement
For now, attorneys are hoping the SJC will take action to provide a temporary increase for bar advocates. CPCS asked the court to set 'a reasonable rate,' pointing to the hourly rates in Maine and New Hampshire.
That so many defendants currently have no lawyer at all 'is crazy,' said Daniel Cappetta, a lawyer who sits on the board for the Middlesex Defense Attorneys, which administers defense attorneys for indigent clients in the county.
'There doesn't feel like there's an end in sight,' he said. 'We've done everything we can to recruit attorneys . . . who will take this work at the current pay rates. That's just not happening.'
Matt Stout can be reached at
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
33 minutes ago
- Fox News
It's ‘suicidal' for GOP reps to vote no on ‘big, beautiful bill,' Newt Gingrich says
All times eastern FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: House lawmakers debate Senate changes to Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'


Fox News
33 minutes ago
- Fox News
Mark Meadows 'optimistic' the House gets Trump's reconciliation bill 'done'
All times eastern FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: House lawmakers debate Senate changes to Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'


The Hill
44 minutes ago
- The Hill
Nevada Democrat says Trump megabill could push gamblers ‘into the black market'
Democratic Rep. Dina Titus (Nev.) said on Wednesday that the GOP megabill backed by President Trump will have an adverse impact on gamblers due to its tax provisions. The big, beautiful bill text would strike previous deductibles by 10 percent, according to the senate passed version. The 90 percent deduction cap would require someone who wins $100,000 and loses $100,000 to pay $10,000 in taxes, despite their profit loss. 'It pushes people into the black market if they don't do regulated gaming because they have a tax disadvantage, and the black market doesn't pay taxes, isn't regulated, doesn't help with problem gaming, so it's bad for the industry as well as for the player,' Titus said during a Wednesday appearance on NewsNation's 'The Hill.' The Nevada lawmaker said the House approved GOP legislation was 'bad enough for my constituents.' She said the newly added language 'adds insult to injury' in a bill that would strike health care provisions, Pell grants and renewable energy measures. 'There's still a bias against gaming. And we found it and thought, well, this is not good for people who enjoy coming to Las Vegas to gamble. We're not talking about only professional poker players,' Titus said. 'We're talking about, you know, the average people who want to play a game of poker or pull a slot machine handle.' Titus said all would be impacted. Professional poker player Phil Galfond echoed her concerns. 'This is really bad. Whether you're a poker player, [Daily fantasy sports] player, a sports better, any kind of gambler – professional or recreational – but especially professional. And even if you are an operator in one of these areas. It's quite scary,' Galfond said in a Tuesday video on X. 'Completely untenable. You can't be a professional gambler in the U.S. if this goes through. And that will have a ripple effect on industries that depend on professionals,' he added. Professional player Doug Polk urged Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) to strike the clause from the bill. 'Chip, I am in your district. There is a provision in the Senate version that will kill professional gambling. This will negatively impact THOUSANDS of Texans,' Polk wrote in a Tuesday post on X. 'Please look at this and help remove this senseless provision.' Titus said she's going to try to get it taken out and added that if it doesn't go back to the House Rules Committee for review, she'll introduce a separate bill to address the revision.