Plug and Play Justice

Choosing the right technology for access to justice applications

In an era obsessed with innovation, complexity often masquerades as progress. But when it comes to legal technology—especially in the realm of access to justice—simplicity should be our north star.

Consider the humble earbuds.

On one hand, we have wireless AirPods: sleek, modern, and packed with features. They connect via Bluetooth, sync across devices, and sit snugly in a high-tech charging case. But they also need to be charged. They can disconnect. They’re expensive to replace. And sometimes, they just don’t work when you need them most- like during an important Zoom meeting.

On the other hand, we have the wired earbuds. Unassuming. Inexpensive. Always ready. Plug them in, and they work—every time. No updates. No battery anxiety. No fiddling with pairing modes.

Both devices serve the same essential function: they let you listen. But the user experience could not be more different. But which one does Apple push on us?

This analogy is more than a reflection on consumer choice. It’s a metaphor for how we should build and deploy technology in legal services, particularly for low-income communities. When we’re designing or acquiring tools for tenants facing eviction, immigrants in detention, or survivors of domestic violence, the cost of failure is too high. A missed connection or a complicated interface doesn’t just mean inconvenience—it could mean losing your home, your family, or your freedom.

Too often, access-to-justice projects reach for the AirPods. We chase the latest trend- the new multi-purpose AI platform, voice-enabled intake, AI avatars, blockchain integrations—without asking whether the people we’re trying to help actually need those features. The result is often an expensive tool that dazzles funders but confuses users, requires constant maintenance, and can’t function without perfect conditions. Worse still, our staff won’t use them.

We need more wired-earbud thinking in legal tech. Tools that are cheap to build, simple to use, and rock-solid reliable. Think webforms that generate letters with photos, like Depositron. Or think chatbots that answer basic questions, like Roxanne.

This isn’t about rejecting innovation. It’s about matching the tool to the task and the context. In many access-to-justice settings, the priority should not be “state of the art” but “works every time.” And “good enough” is fine. Sometimes tech-forward thinkers, like me, get too excited about the latest thing. Instead, we should focus on the thing that works.

So before you reach for the latest AI gadget or platform, ask yourself: am I choosing it because it’s better—or just because it’s newer? Are these the AirPods of legal tech?

For most people in crisis, justice doesn’t need to be state of the art. It needs to be there when they need it. Plug and play. Every time.