Update on that divorce ruling

Update on that divorce ruling I wrote about: Various respectable publications editorialized in support of the court decision, noting with horror that if people were granted the right to state-supported divorce attorneys, all us taxpayers would have to pay for it. The Seattle Times raised the specter of huge costs—without providing any information on exactly how much it would cost. Finally this week came a well-supported op-ed in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer effectively debunking this argument. Lawyers involved in the Equal Justice Coalition pointed out that there are costs involved in not offering people lawyers—court cases go on longer, because the judge has to slow down and explain everything to people representing themselves. At the same time, they pointed to actual evidence that the costs of offering divorce lawyers to those who can't afford them would be minor. Yet the gains would be great.