Massachusetts’ criminal justice system is facing significant challenges due to a work stoppage by court-appointed attorneys, known as bar advocates, who represent indigent defendants. This action has led to a backlog of unrepresented individuals and prompted the state’s highest court to intervene.
On May 27, 2025, many bar advocates ceased accepting new cases, citing unsustainable compensation rates. In Massachusetts, these attorneys earn $65 per hour for district court cases and $85 per hour for superior court cases. In contrast, neighboring states offer higher rates: Rhode Island pays $112 per hour, New Hampshire offers up to $150 per hour, and Maine provides $150 per hour across the board. The disparity has contributed to a decline in attorneys willing to take on these cases, leading to a “mass exodus” from the profession. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/05/27/metro/massachusetts-public-defender-bar-advocate-work-stoppage//?utm_source=openai))
The work stoppage has resulted in hundreds of defendants without legal representation. As of early July, Suffolk County reported 603 unrepresented defendants, including 45 in custody, while Middlesex County had 587 unrepresented individuals, with 25 in custody. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/07/03/metro/bar-advocates-strike-lavallee-protocol/?utm_source=openai))
In response, Supreme Judicial Court Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt invoked the Lavallee protocol, a measure established in 2004 during a similar crisis. This protocol mandates the release of defendants held without counsel for more than seven days and allows for the dismissal of charges if representation is not provided within 45 days. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/07/03/metro/bar-advocates-strike-lavallee-protocol/?utm_source=openai))
The Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS), overseeing the state’s public defender system, has emphasized that the Lavallee protocol is a temporary solution. Anthony Benedetti, CPCS’s chief counsel, stated, “This judicial intervention is a vital safeguard for the rights of individuals who are facing prosecution without the benefit of legal counsel. But make no mistake: the Lavallee protocol is a temporary measure. It does not address the root cause of the crisis — an insufficient number of private attorneys willing to take cases at the current hourly rates.” ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/07/03/metro/bar-advocates-strike-lavallee-protocol/?utm_source=openai))
Efforts to increase compensation have faced obstacles. A legislative proposal to raise bar advocates’ hourly rates to at least $100 was cut during budget negotiations. ([wbur.org](https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/07/03/sjc-order-release-unrepresented-criminal-defendants?utm_source=openai))
The situation underscores the critical role of adequate compensation in ensuring the constitutional right to counsel and the effective functioning of the criminal justice system. Without resolution, the system risks further strain, potentially compromising the rights of defendants and the integrity of legal proceedings.
Massachusetts’ criminal justice system is facing significant challenges due to a work stoppage by court-appointed attorneys, known as bar advocates, who represent indigent defendants. This action has led to a backlog of unrepresented individuals and prompted the state’s highest court to intervene.
On May 27, 2025, many bar advocates ceased accepting new cases, citing unsustainable compensation rates. In Massachusetts, these attorneys earn $65 per hour for district court cases and $85 per hour for superior court cases. In contrast, neighboring states offer higher rates: Rhode Island pays $112 per hour, New Hampshire offers up to $150 per hour, and Maine provides $150 per hour across the board. The disparity has contributed to a decline in attorneys willing to take on these cases, leading to a “mass exodus” from the profession. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/05/27/metro/massachusetts-public-defender-bar-advocate-work-stoppage//?utm_source=openai))
The work stoppage has resulted in hundreds of defendants without legal representation. As of early July, Suffolk County reported 603 unrepresented defendants, including 45 in custody, while Middlesex County had 587 unrepresented individuals, with 25 in custody. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/07/03/metro/bar-advocates-strike-lavallee-protocol/?utm_source=openai))
In response, Supreme Judicial Court Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt invoked the Lavallee protocol, a measure established in 2004 during a similar crisis. This protocol mandates the release of defendants held without counsel for more than seven days and allows for the dismissal of charges if representation is not provided within 45 days. ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/07/03/metro/bar-advocates-strike-lavallee-protocol/?utm_source=openai))
The Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS), overseeing the state’s public defender system, has emphasized that the Lavallee protocol is a temporary solution. Anthony Benedetti, CPCS’s chief counsel, stated, “This judicial intervention is a vital safeguard for the rights of individuals who are facing prosecution without the benefit of legal counsel. But make no mistake: the Lavallee protocol is a temporary measure. It does not address the root cause of the crisis — an insufficient number of private attorneys willing to take cases at the current hourly rates.” ([bostonglobe.com](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/07/03/metro/bar-advocates-strike-lavallee-protocol/?utm_source=openai))
Efforts to increase compensation have faced obstacles. A legislative proposal to raise bar advocates’ hourly rates to at least $100 was cut during budget negotiations. ([wbur.org](https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/07/03/sjc-order-release-unrepresented-criminal-defendants?utm_source=openai))
The situation underscores the critical role of adequate compensation in ensuring the constitutional right to counsel and the effective functioning of the criminal justice system. Without resolution, the system risks further strain, potentially compromising the rights of defendants and the integrity of legal proceedings.