Podcast Summary

Podcast: New Books Network

Episode: Jamila Michener and Mallory E. Sorelle, "Uncivil Democracy: How Access to Justice Shapes Political Power" (Princeton UP, 2026)
Host: Ursula Hackett
Guests: Jamila Michener, Mallory E. Sorelle
Date: February 22, 2026

1. Episode Overview

This episode explores "Uncivil Democracy," a groundbreaking book by political scientists Jamila Michener and Mallory E. Sorelle. The book investigates how access to civil justice—especially in housing—shapes political power, democracy, and inequality in the United States. Through quantitative data, interviews, and ethnography, the authors illuminate the deeply human effects of the "justice gap," particularly for those at the margins of economic, racial, and gender hierarchies. The conversation also delves into the interplay between individual legal struggles and collective organizing as sources of democratic renewal.

2. Origins & Motivation for the Book

Jamila Michener's Motivation

• Inspired by early experiences at Queens Legal Services, representing low-income clients and witnessing unmet needs for legal representation in communities of color.
• Became “struck” by the limitations of individual legal aid and the magnitude of unmet need.
• Shifted her focus from being a practitioner to investigating the systemic roots of inequality.

“[The] need was dramatically bigger than the lawyers could supply.” (Jamila, 04:03)

• Academic trajectory paused these interests until later in her career when she could turn them into research (04:53).

Mallory Sorelle’s Trajectory

• Influenced by work at the National Consumer Law Center, observing extreme inequalities in debt collection courts.
• Noted the repeat pattern of unrepresented low-income individuals versus well-lawyered corporate adversaries.

3. Key Concepts and Themes

A. The Justice Gap (06:09)

• Defined as the disconnect between the need for civil legal representation and actual access—particularly acute for low-income Americans.
• Around 250 million Americans encounter at least a civil legal issue per year; 75-80% of low-income individuals have at least one each year.
• Most lack access to adequate legal counsel; no constitutional guarantee for civil cases, unlike criminal cases.

“The overwhelming majority of low income clients... are showing up alone... and as you can imagine, that doesn’t generally turn in their favor.” (Mallory, 07:19)

B. Racialization of Civil Justice (08:15)

• Legal problems are intertwined with economic and racial inequalities.
• Black and Latina women are disproportionately exposed to precarious housing, high debt, and discriminatory treatment by landlords.

"You’re more likely to be living in precarious housing as a kind of black or Latina woman in the U.S..." (Jamila, 09:06)

C. Interconnection with Broader Social Issues (12:43)

• Problems of housing, debt, health, public benefits, and childcare are closely linked; failure in one area often triggers legal challenges in others.
• Policy responses often focus on providing counsel rather than addressing root causes.
• Policymaker support for legal aid depends on perceptions of client “deservedness” and whether clients are in conflict with the state.

D. The Role of Gender (17:38)

• Women, especially women of color, are particularly vulnerable to predation and exploitation in the housing sector.
• Legal issues are often compounded by gendered power dynamics (e.g., harassment or coercion by landlords).

“Women are particularly vulnerable to predation... every one of those points of interaction creates an opportunity for some kind of predation or harm to be perpetrated against women.” (Jamila, 18:50)

E. Cross-National Insights (22:21)

• U.S. stands out among high-income nations for poor access to affordable, discrimination-free civil legal services.
• Differences include a weaker social safety net and a predominance of "staff model" legal aid over fee-for-service approaches used elsewhere.
• Some lessons about access to counsel are broadly applicable, but structural issues often shape local realities.

“When we compare the U.S. to other high income countries, the U.S. ranks near the bottom for measures of access to civil legal services, affordability... and also discrimination within the civil legal system.” (Mallory, 22:44)

4. Geographic Differences and Policy Variation

State and Local Variations (25:06)

• Experiences in eviction courts vary widely: e.g., Fulton County, GA, often pushes for arbitration without legal representation, while NYC courts emphasize finding representation and adjourn cases until tenants are represented.
• Differences tie back to local law, court norms, and availability of legal services, with real impact on outcomes.

“In Georgia ... the judges will often say, well, why don’t you go into the hallway and see if you can work something out... I never saw [in NYC] a judge say, why don’t you go out in the hallway and come up with your own deal with the landlord.” (Jamila, 27:02)

5. Impact of the Pandemic on Access and Research

COVID-19 Effects (31:39)

• Pandemic elevated logistical and substantive obstacles to justice (e.g., erroneous Zoom links leading to wrongful evictions).
• Many barriers pre- and post-pandemic persisted, such as unreliable mail and lack of notice for hearings.
• The pandemic shifted much of the research and organizing efforts onto virtual platforms, enabling new forms of tenant group ethnography.

“The same types of problems still occur both prior to and after the pandemic.” (Mallory, 33:01)

6. Policy Feedback, Political Power, and Organizing

Policy Feedback Loops (36:10)

• Drawing on policy feedback literature, the book posits that negative experiences with courts erode civic engagement and trust.
• Access to counsel can mitigate these negative effects and enhance individuals’ sense of citizenship.
• Collective organizing (especially tenant organizing) presents the most promising path for transforming harm into power and possibility.

“When we invest resources in giving people protection ... we are investing resources in democracy and in their ability to be incorporated into that democracy.” (Jamila, 40:19)

• The dynamic interplay between the individualization of legal problems and the collectivizing force of grassroots action is a central analytic theme.

“These feedback processes can be shaped by collective organizing and processes that bring us much closer to what I think the core ethos of democracy is.” (Jamila, 41:46)

Individual vs. Collective Solutions (44:22)

• Both courts and organizing groups struggle with balancing immediate, individual needs versus broader, structural power-building.
• Legal aid can yield small, isolated victories (e.g., recovering a $200 repair expense) but often fails to address community-wide issues—unless channeled into collective action.

“Tenant groups grapple with the same debate. How do we balance solving our members’... legal needs versus making enough space for the broader goal of collective power building?” (Mallory, 48:03)

7. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Jamila Michener on the purpose and arc of the book:
  "The thing that kept us motivated and excited and inspired in the book was seeing how much collective organizing played a role." (42:57)

• Mallory Sorelle on conservative vs progressive frames:
  “On the other side of the aisle, there were many conservative policymakers who actually viewed access to counsel as a way to channel growing collective rage among many groups into these individual, what they referred to as the civilizing mechanism of the courts.” (47:13)

• Host Ursula Hackett on the book's method:
  “It is absolutely beautifully written. It is rich and it is intensely human, and it... brings together quantitative political science and the stories, the everyday experiences of people who are struggling.” (01:14)

• Jamila Michener on organizing:
  "Now it’s not just that we're minimizing the harm that comes from being processed through courts... but we're actually creating the opportunity to build your power.” (41:02)

8. What's Next for the Authors?

• Jamila Michener:
  Working on a new book comparing the political economy and grassroots organizing in tenant and health care spaces, focusing on how ordinary people build power to produce structural change. (48:57)

"It's kind of a comparative case study...going to go much deeper on the organizing front while retaining this connection to kind of political economy." (Jamila, 49:47)

• Mallory Sorelle:
  Continuing to investigate cross-national comparisons, focusing on how different systems for legal representation impact access and justice, and how lessons from the U.S. might apply elsewhere. (50:38)

9. Timestamps for Key Segments

• [02:08] - Jamila’s personal/professional motivation
• [06:09] - Mallory defines the “justice gap”
• [08:15] - Jamila on racialization of legal access
• [12:43] - Interconnections between housing and broader social problems
• [17:38] - Gender, vulnerability, and predation in housing
• [22:21] - Cross-national and comparative insights
• [25:52] - State and local variation in justice access
• [31:39] - Pandemic’s effect on research and legal system access
• [36:10] - Policy feedback, democracy, and organizing as solutions
• [44:22] - Individual vs. collective empowerment and policy tension
• [48:57] - Authors discuss future projects

10. Tone & Language

The discussion is deeply human, nuanced, empathetic, and academically rigorous, blending personal narrative, empirical data, and policy analysis. Both authors emphasize the limits of individualized legal solutions and the transformative potential of collective organizing, while also attending closely to the structural determinants of inequality.

11. Conclusion

This episode offers a comprehensive and illuminating look at how limited access to civil justice undercuts democracy and perpetuates inequality—and how grassroots collective action can counterbalance those harms. The conversation teems with rich empirical insight, memorable personal stories, and a call to recognize the connection between legal access, political power, and the lived realities of marginalized communities.

Recommended for:

• Scholars and students of law, political science, social justice
• Activists, policymakers, legal aid providers
• General audiences interested in the intersection of justice and democracy