In Rhode Island’s civil courts, people facing eviction, foreclosure, custody loss and other civil matters, are increasingly showing up alone, without lawyers. Across the United States, more than 75% of civil cases involve at least one self-represented litigant (SRL). In Rhode Island, that number is even higher. Yet our state remains one of only seven without an Commission for Access to Justice, the proven model states use to make the courts work for everyone, not just those who can afford representation.

Studies show that parties with lawyers are six times more likely to win than those without. It’s not because unrepresented citizens are wrong, it’s because the system is built for lawyers.  At the center of this issue is a contradiction Rhode Island can no longer ignore. Every judge swears an oath to “support this (Rhode Island) Constitution, and the Constitution of the United States.” That promise is not symbolic; it is the enforceable condition of judicial authority. Supporting the Constitution requires upholding due process, equal protection, and the right to meaningful hearings, all guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments and fully integrated into the Constitution through Article V.

Yet Rhode Island maintains Judicial Rule 2.2(B), which allows accommodations for self-represented litigants to be discretionary. Not required. Optional. This is where the constitutional fault line opens.

Most other states follow the American Bar Association’s model rule, which explicitly allows judges to help unrepresented parties so that hearings are fair, by providing accommodations. Rhode Island’s omission of Comment [4] from that model rule creates a loophole that leaves fairness optional.

Our judiciary’s own website deepens the divide. It warns citizens: “Although you can represent yourself, you are tasked with having the same knowledge of the court process as an attorney.” That expectation is impossible. Requiring citizens to perform as lawyers while denying them access to the same tools is not equal justice, it is a two-tiered system, one for the represented and one for everyone else.

This policy vacuum hurts families, tenants, and consumers.  In eviction court, unrepresented renters lose housing at alarming rates; parents lose custody without ever understanding why. Ignoring record‑supported facts or dismissing arguments solely because they come from a non‑lawyer is discrimination. In Rhode Island, judges are allowed to do this without accountability.

When courts fail to protect the rights of those without counsel, democracy begins to crumble. Strengthening access to justice in Rhode Island is one of the most direct ways to reinforce the rule of law.  Injustice normalized is destructive. Silence and tolerance allow wrongdoing to persist. Societies decay when people adapt instead of resisting. A right that depends on a judge’s personal discretion is not a right. Awareness is the first defense.

When courts treat every person, represented or not, with fairness, they reinforce the rule of law at the exact moment some actors are working to weaken it. In a time when bad‑faith attacks on democratic norms are growing louder, restoring trust in our courts is one of the most concrete ways to defend the system that protects us all.

This issue has persisted in silence for too long, and the public deserves to understand how these rules affect their rights.  A Commission for Access to Justice would help correct this disparity. The current Rhode Island Office for Access to Justice is little more than a public‑relations facade, creating the appearance of protection, while leaving underlying constitutional failures untouched. Establishing a Commission for Access to Justice would help judges, lawyers, and citizens work together to ensure that all Rhode Islanders, regardless of income, receive fair treatment.

To learn more about the disparities facing self-represented litigants, visit www.justicebelongstoeveryone.org.