"I've always been driven by the concept of equal justice under the law, but only the rich can pay great sums of money for legal assistance and that puts them at an advantage over the poor"

Samuel Dash points to a central contradiction in liberal democracy: the law promises equal treatment, yet access to legal power is rationed by wealth. The ideal of “equal justice under law” requires that outcomes turn on facts and legal principles, not on the size of a defendant’s wallet. But the ability to hire skilled counsel, investigators, and expert witnesses, to devote time to discovery, and to mount a sustained defense confers measurable advantages. The result is a stratified courtroom where the affluent can shape narratives, exploit procedural rights, and negotiate favorable resolutions, while the poor face truncated choices.

Public defense was meant to cure this gap, but chronic underfunding and overwhelming caseloads often make representation thin, hurried, and reactive. Pretrial detention tied to cash bail amplifies disparities: those who cannot pay remain jailed, lose jobs and housing, and feel pressure to accept plea deals regardless of merit. Wealthier defendants, free pretrial, collaborate with counsel, preserve evidence, and arrive at court better prepared. Even after conviction, resources matter, financing appeals, hiring mitigation specialists, and navigating collateral consequences.

These dynamics corrode legitimacy. If liberty and liability hinge on money rather than culpability, the rule of law looks like a marketplace. The poor are more likely to plead guilty, carry records that limit opportunity, and lose faith in institutions, while sophisticated offenders can insulate themselves from accountability. Formal equality without substantive capacity becomes a hollow promise.

Closing the gap demands material commitments, not slogans. Fund public defense at parity with prosecution; enforce caseload caps; provide state-funded investigators and experts for indigent clients; narrow or abolish cash bail; strengthen discovery obligations; collect and publish outcome data by income; expand civil legal aid and pro bono; and simplify procedures so rights are usable without elite counsel. Equal justice requires more than identical rules, it requires the resources that make those rules genuinely accessible, ensuring the law protects the powerless as effectively as it does the powerful.