Authored By: Kate Elodie Volbert
Middlesex University
Abstract
This article reflects the flaws of the law, ranging from the illusion of legal neutrality, discrimination and racism, nepotism, and elitism, to how laws are obeyed out of fear rather than out of genuine belief in their fairness. However, it is not a mere critique, but the voice of perseverance and the resilience of those unheard, those who refuse to give up on an industry that does not seem to want them. Indeed, it is somewhat personal: the story of a first-gen law student from a low socio-economic background, with no connections or what would be called “backing” in her country, from the wrong ethnicity, from the “ghetto,” as one would call it in her country, yet who has a dream that she will not surrender just because she is not being handed a seat at the table. It is not a sob story; instead, it is about encouragement, about the realities of life, and how, despite not being handed a seat at the table, we can bring our own chair. About breaking down the door when it isn’t opening. Because something that the marginalised share is our resilience. So yes, we are not handed everything, but we have the ability to build it.
Introduction: Whose Justice Is It Anyway?
James Baldwin once said, “If one really wishes to know how justice is administered in a country, one does not question the policeman, the lawyers, the judges, or the protected members of the middle class. One goes to the unprotected, those, precisely, who need the law’s protection the most, and listens to their testimony.”1 His words remain painfully relevant today, pointing us towards the uncomfortable truth that justice, despite its universal claims, is often experienced very differently by those on society’s margins. Although many would argue that legal systems have made significant progress in recent decades, for countless individuals, particularly Black and Brown communities, the poor, immigrants, and other marginalised groups, the law still functions less as a shield and more as a weapon. What is so often presented as a neutral, impartial system is, in reality, deeply shaped by race, class, and power. As a first-generation law student, I do not approach this conversation as a detached academic. I come into the legal field not from a place of comfort or tradition, but from lived experience, from a family and community that has too often felt the harshest edge of legal authority. I am not just studying the law; I am stepping into a system that has historically excluded people like me. This critique is both personal and political. This article challenges the myth of neutrality within the legal system. It argues that the law is not merely a tool of justice but often an instrument of exclusion that is upheld through fear, silence, and social hierarchy. It also considers the areas of progress that do exist but not through the eyes of the privileged. Instead, it asks what does justice truly look like for those who have never fully received it?
The Myth of Equality Before the Law
One of the main principles taught at the beginning of our law journey is equality before the law, which often proves to be more of a myth than a reality. Indeed, despite its origins tracing back to the Magna Carta, which arose out of necessity to emphasise that no one, not even the king in such a conservative time, was above the law after King John of England abused his powers by unjustly imprisoning people without trial and seizing lands and property without legal justification, among other abuses.2 One would, therefore, think that in the 21st century, the situation would have drastically improved, but unfortunately, it depends on who we focus on because, like beauty, which lies in the eye of the beholder, the concept of equality before the law can be equally subjective. While the law may apply the same rules to rich and poor alike, their vastly different social realities lead to vastly different experiences of justice. As Anatole France cynically observed, the law prohibits both the rich and the poor from sleeping under bridges, but only the poor are ever truly at risk of doing so.3 Nowadays, situations arise where the marginalised find themselves criminalised because of their circumstances, putting them into situations the privileged could never fall into. Institutionalised bias against those communities only seems to exacerbate the myth of equality before the law. To exemplify, a study conducted by the University of Greenwich using a questionnaire aimed at male prisoners to explore their experiences identified that of those convicted under joint enterprise, 57.4 per cent were from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups (37.7 per cent Black or Black British, 4.7 per cent Asian, and 15.5 per cent mixed race), compared to 38.5 per cent who were White.4 This trend persists across most cases. Studies have found that Black Americans are more than twice as likely as White Americans to be killed by police officers, which raises serious questions about how everyone is supposed to be equal before the law when they fear those who are supposed to protect them.5 Studies also show that 58 per cent of respondents who interacted with police or law enforcement officers and who thought or knew they were transgender experienced mistreatment such as verbal harassment, persistent and deliberate misgendering, and physical or sexual assault at their hands, emphasising how equality is often subjective.6
Policing, Race, and the Reality of Criminalisation
The evident link between race and the law is so deep that it demands careful examination. Indeed, when ethnic minorities encounter the police, they are in most cases instantly identified or labelled as the perpetrator rather than the victim, leading to widespread mistrust in law enforcement. To illustrate, a British study in 2022 revealed that those who were unconfident in the police outnumbered those who were confident by 5 per cent, emphasising the gravity of the situation when people cannot trust those who are supposed to protect them. For example, a Black public relations officer affirms that her mistrust of the police stems from an early experience when she was accused of having incited her own sexual assault because she had consumed a little alcohol. She has also experienced several stop-and-search encounters because of her physical appearance, including her black skin and braids, while her White counterparts from the same background and area have never been in the same situation or had their concerns dismissed so readily. She goes as far as to say that she would never call the police even if she were in trouble, showing how deep her wounds run.7 Unfortunately, this trend is omnipresent in the United States, where several racist messages, including offensive references to African children, Somali people, and Auschwitz, were uncovered after being shared by police officers, raising serious concerns about how individuals with such mindsets are expected to protect those they demean.8
Justice Denied: Legal Aid Cuts and Economic Barriers
Moreover, cuts to legal aid and economic disparity significantly affect the notion of justice. For example, the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has faced numerous challenges associated with austerity, including reductions in legal aid, failures to disclose potentially exculpatory evidence by the prosecution, and threats to the reliability of forensic science.9 Cuts to legal aid have resulted in weaker defences for defendants,10 depriving them of their right to a fair trial as protected by the Human Rights Act 1998.11 Criminal justice experts and advocacy groups have raised concerns about underfunding and its detrimental effects, such as an inability to investigate complex cases thoroughly or to apply new investigative techniques and technologies that might uncover critical evidence.12 Underfunding and limited powers have also led to case backlogs, further delaying the delivery of justice rather than resolving it.13 As the saying goes, “justice delayed is justice denied”,14 and in most cases, it is those from poorer backgrounds who are in greatest need of legal aid to access justice. individuals who can afford the best lawyers often have a distinct advantage compared to their counterparts, who in the absence of legal aid are left to fend for themselves. For instance, the increase in litigants in person has been linked to cuts in legal aid, often leaving vulnerable victims to be cross-examined by their perpetrators. This experience can cause significant stress and health problems.15 In the McLibel case,16 this disparity was evident when activists relied on pro bono assistance after being denied legal aid to defend themselves against McDonald’s, which spent millions on its defence. Fortunately, the European Court of Human Rights found that their lack of legal aid breached their right to a fair trial and freedom of expression, ordering compensation from the UK government.17 Nonetheless, this case raises questions about how many individuals are denied representation due to lack of financial means.
Elitism and Exclusion in the Legal Profession
Additionally, the legal profession is plagued by nepotism, elitism, and gatekeeping. Despite modern progress, the field of law often remains a closed network where first-generation lawyers or students from working-class backgrounds face exclusion when trying to access internships, clerkships, and positions at large firms. A study by the London School of Economics found a high degree of “micro-class reproduction” in the legal profession, revealing that children of lawyers are nearly nineteen times more likely to become lawyers themselves than the general population.18Similarly, first-generation graduates are thirty per cent less likely to be hired by large firms and tend to earn significantly less on average, due in part to smaller networks and limited access to mentoring. According to research by the Grattan Institute, only ten per cent of high school students enrolling in law degrees across Australia between 2005 and 2015 came from the lowest socio-economic quartile, as defined by the Department of Education. The International Journal of the Legal Profession has highlighted how recruitment norms in law firms often unfairly devalue less prestigious educational backgrounds and non-traditional skill sets.19 Even when individuals from minority or underrepresented groups do make it into top firms, discrimination continues. Harvard Law’s “Making of Lawyers’ Careers” report points to systemic inequality in career progression. Minority and non-traditional lawyers are often channelled into stagnant tracks, despite entering elite firms.20 In Australia, observers have noted that it is still common for admissions to be moved by someone’s father, uncle, or spouse, reinforcing the reality that the legal profession remains largely inaccessible to those without personal or financial connections. This raises important questions about how the concept of equality in the law can be sustained when so many are denied entry into the profession itself.
Obeying Out of Fear: Power, Control and the Law
Another deep flaw within the legal system is that many obey the law out of fear rather than a genuine belief in its fairness. The law may function as a necessary framework to maintain order in society, but this raises questions about what people truly believe in when the law is not watching. For instance, marital rape was once widely normalised and legally permissible until the landmark case of R v R,21 where the House of Lords ruled that a husband could be found guilty of raping his wife, thereby affirming that marriage does not amount to automatic or permanent consent. Legal history is also full of examples where discriminatory practices were actively upheld by law. In the United States, racial segregation was long protected by the courts under the doctrine of “separate but equal”, as seen in Plessy v Ferguson22 in 1896. More recently, the rollback of anti discrimination protections under Donald Trump’s administration illustrated how quickly legal safeguards for minorities can be removed, suggesting that attitudes may never have changed at their core, only gone dormant. Furthermore, the law is frequently used to suppress the very rights it is meant to protect. Maina Kiai has argued that too much emphasis remains on preserving public order,23 continuing a historical trend of prioritising order over human rights. For instance, in the ‘kettling’ case, protesters were detained for hours without food or water,24 breaching their Convention rights.25 In Laporte,26 the police prevented passengers from disembarking a coach, assuming a breach of the peace without evidence, violating their Convention rights,27 even if the court later ruled the arrest unjustified, finding no imminent threat. Police also imposed severe restrictions based on public order concerns, even arresting peaceful protesters in the Extinction Rebellion demonstrations28 and the Sarah Everard vigil.29 These actions illustrate how the lack of clear legal safeguards leads to disproportionate restrictions, with police acting on their own interpretation of public order. The failure to entrench human rights protections, particularly the right to peaceful assembly,30 means the law continues to prioritise public order over fundamental freedoms. Concerns around the PCSCA31 include excessive use of stop-and-search powers and the disproportionate scope of Serious Disruption Prevention Orders. These sweeping restrictions on peaceful protest, often targeting movements like Extinction Rebellion, strongly reinforce Kiai’s concern that the UK legal system prioritises maintaining public order over safeguarding human rights.32 These laws appear to target protest movements and disproportionately affect marginalised groups, reinforcing Kiai’s concerns that maintaining public order has been prioritised over protecting fundamental freedoms. Drawing on Max Weber’s theory of legal-rational authority, we understand that legal compliance should ideally be based on belief in the system’s legitimacy. However, when the system excludes or criminalises the vulnerable, its authority becomes fragile and superficial.
Changing the Narrative: Unconventional Backgrounds and Legal Reform
It is important to reflect on what it means to enter this system as someone who was not born into it. Yet, despite the emotional and ethical conflict between how to change the system from within and what it costs to do so, it is important to consider how things are changing steadily but surely, and how coming from an unconventional background is actually what the system needs. Indeed, success stories speak for themselves. To exemplify, Arlia Fleming, who came from a single-parent household, was the first in her family to enter the legal profession and managed to gain admission despite the challenging circumstances. Toni Muddott also highlights her empathy for people, irrespective of their experience, which she believes cannot be easily replicated by those from high socio-economic backgrounds. I agree, because the best way to understand someone who is in prison or living in a disadvantaged community is to at least be willing to imagine what it is like to walk in their shoes.33 Organisations are also working to improve access to the legal field for marginalised individuals. For example, Slaughter and May has set a target to increase the proportion of lawyers from more deprived backgrounds, from 10 per cent to 15 per cent by 2033, and from 19 per cent to 25 per cent of employees overall.34 Moreover, as Angela Melville, a senior law lecturer and published researcher at Flinders University, wrote in her 2014 report, “Until the early 1970s, the Australian legal profession was almost exclusively the domain of white men from privileged backgrounds.35Therefore, despite the challenges mentioned above, as a first-generation law student, I have faith in the law as long as people like me continue to fight for those who need it most.
Stories of Resistance and Resilience
Jason O’Neil, an Indigenous lawyer from Parkes in New South Wales, provides another powerful example. He received an ATAR in the seventies, which was significantly below the required mark for guaranteed entry to law school. However, through the UNSW Indigenous Pre-Law programme, he gained admission to study law. He later graduated with Honours, was awarded the university medal, and now serves as Director of Ngalaya Indigenous Corporation, the representative body for First Nations lawyers and students in New South Wales. O’Neil explains that his parents did not attend university and worked in modest jobs, including as couriers and small business owners. Yet, when he began studying law, the generational impact on his family was immediate. His younger brother also enrolled at UNSW through the same entry scheme, and university suddenly became a family reality. He recalls the cultural shock of arriving at UNSW and hearing peers discuss elite schools he had never even heard of, underscoring how access to legal education remains skewed by privilege.36
Progress and Hope: Towards a More Inclusive Legal System
Fortunately, some organisations are working to improve access to the legal profession for underrepresented groups. Slaughter and May, for instance, have committed to increasing the proportion of lawyers from more deprived backgrounds from ten per cent to fifteen per cent by 2033, and their overall workforce from nineteen per cent to twenty-five per cent.37 In Australia, the legal profession has made considerable progress in gender and LGBTQI representation, even reaching a milestone in 2018 where female solicitors outnumbered their male counterparts nationwide. However, as Angela Melville points out, the number of lawyers from low socio economic backgrounds remains persistently low. She argues that university admission systems, including ATAR rankings, disproportionately benefit students from elite schools, limiting access for capable students from disadvantaged communities. A profession that reflects the diversity of the community it serves is better placed to understand and advocate for the needs of that community. A judiciary drawn from such a profession will be better equipped to serve the entire population, rather than narrow interests.38
Conclusion: We Bring Our Own Chairs
The law is still plagued by discrimination and presents an illusion of equality, but there is also a growing light. Through the lens of a first-generation law student, it becomes clear that while the system remains unequal, there are people who continue to fight for what they believe in and succeed. Justice may look different for the marginalised, but that does not mean we will stop. Even if the progress is slow, the norm is changing. We will continue to fight until one day our presence is no longer an exception but part of the foundation of the legal system itself.
Bibliography:
Primary sources:
Cases:
McDonald’s Corporation v Steel and Morris [1997] EWHC QB 366
Steel and Morris v United Kingdom [2005] ECHR 68416/01
R v R [1992] 1 AC 599
Plessy v Ferguson 163 US 537 (1896)
Austin v United Kingdom (Application Nos 39692/09 40713/09 and 41008/09), [2012] Crim LR 544, 176 CL&J 225
R (on the application of Laporte) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary (Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police and another interested parties), [2006] UKHL 55, [2007] 2 AC 105
Statutes:
Human Rights Act 1998, s 6
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022
Treaty:
European Convention on Human Rights 1950
Secondary sources:
Book:
Baldwin J, No Name in the Street (Dial Press 1972)
France A, The Red Lily (first published 1894, Project Gutenberg 2004)
Hoyle C and Sato M, Reasons to Doubt: Wrongful Convictions and the Criminal Cases Review Commission (First Edition, Oxford University Press 2019)
Reports:
National Center for Transgender Equality, ‘Failing to Protect and Serve: Police Department Policies Towards Transgender People’ (May 2019).
Prof Richard Vogler, Dr Lucy Welsh, Dr Amy Clarke, Dr Susann Wiedlitzka, and Dr Liz McDonnell, ‘The Criminal Cases Review Commission: Legal Aid and Legal Representatives’ (Final Report, University of Sussex, March 2021
The Law Society of England and Wales, ‘Access Denied? LASPO four years on: A Law Society Review’ (June 2017).
The Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association ‘Report by Special Rapporteur Maina Kiai’ (17 June 2013) UN Doc. A/HRC/23/39/Add.1.
Dunja Mijatović, Commissioner for Human Rights, Report Following Her Visit to tThe United Kingdom from 27 June to 1 July 2022 (CommDH(2022)27, 2022) Council of Europe
Articles:
Carl Bialik, ‘Why Are So Many Black Americans Killed By Police?’ (abc News, 21 July 2016)
Aidan Milan, ‘an illustration of a police officer at a crime scene‘I would never ever call them if I was in trouble’: The complex question of trusting the police’ (Metro, 29 March 2022)
Emma Brazell, ‘Nearly 1,000 cops investigated for offensive social media content since 2015’ (Mtro News, 4 October 2021)
Jon Robins, ‘Garnier: “It is Important After 25 Years the CCRC Should Be Re-Examined. If Things Can Be Improved, Why Not?”’ (The Justice Gap, 5 March 2021)
Andy Gregory, Amy-Clare Martin, ‘Surge in backlog of wrongful conviction appeals at under fire watchdog’ (The Independent, 2 November 2024)
Dr Peter Hammond, ‘Magna Carta – The First Bill of Rights’ (RealHistoryResources.org, 18 October 2024)
Kate Allman, ‘A profession for the wealthy? The enduring problem for diversity in law’ (LSJ Online, 01 December 2020)
Dr Andrew Francis Taylor and Hilary Sommerlad, ‘Access to legal work experience and its role in the (re)production of legal professional identity’ (Taylor & Francis Online, 24 November 2009).
Zlata Rodionova, ‘Section 14: what public order act means for Extinction Rebellion after London protest was banned by police’ (The I Paper, 17 October 2019)
Dominic Casciani, ‘Sarah Everard: What went wrong at the Clapham vigil?’ (BBC, 14 March 2021)
Harvard Law School, ‘Inequality in Lawyers’ Careers’ (Center on the Legal Professional, July/August 2024)
Suzi Ring, ‘Law firms forge new career paths in bid to tackle social mobility’ (Financial Times, 13 September 2024)
Other:
Magna Carta 1215
L Hewitt, The Impact of R v Jogee: An Examination of Applications to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) (University of Greenwich 2023)
1James Baldwin, No Name in the Street (Dial Press 1972).
2 Magna Carta 1215.
3 Anatole France, The Red Lily (first published 1894, Project Gutenberg 2004).
4 L Hewitt, The Impact of R v Jogee: An Examination of Applications to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) (University of Greenwich 2023).
5 Carl Bialik, ‘Why Are So Many Black Americans Killed By Police?’ (abc News, 21 July 2016) <https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-are-so-many-black-americans-killed-by-police/> accessed 19 July 2025. 6 National Center for Transgender Equality, ‘Failing to Protect and Serve: Police Department Policies Towards Transgender People’ (May 2019).
7 Aidan Milan, ‘an illustration of a police officer at a crime scene‘I would never ever call them if I was in trouble’: The complex question of trusting the police’ (Metro, 29 March 2022) < https://metro.co.uk/2022/03/29/i-would-never-ever-call-them-the-question-of-trust-in-the-police 14567530/> accessed 19 July 2025.
8 Emma Brazell, ‘Nearly 1,000 cops investigated for offensive social media content since 2015’ (Mtro News, 4 October 2021) < https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/04/nearly-1000-cops-investigated-for-offensive-social-media-content since-2015-15359711/> accessed 19 July 2025.
9Jon Robins, ‘Garnier: “It is Important After 25 Years the CCRC Should Be Re-Examined. If Things Can Be Improved, Why Not?”’ (The Justice Gap, 5 March 2021) < https://www.thejusticegap.com/garnier-it-is-important after-25-years-the-work-of-the-ccrc-should-be-re-examined-if-things-can-be-improved-why-not/> accessed 19 July 2025.
10 Hoyle C and Sato M, Reasons to Doubt: Wrongful Convictions and the Criminal Cases Review Commission (First Edition, Oxford University Press 2019).
11 Human Rights Act 1998, s 6.
12 Prof Richard Vogler, Dr Lucy Welsh, Dr Amy Clarke, Dr Susann Wiedlitzka, and Dr Liz McDonnell, ‘The Criminal Cases Review Commission: Legal Aid and Legal Representatives’ (Final Report, University of Sussex, March 2021).
13 Andy Gregory, Amy-Clare Martin, ‘Surge in backlog of wrongful conviction appeals at under-fire watchdog’ (The Independent, 2 November 2024) < https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/ccrc-miscarriages-justice wrongful-conviction-appeal-b2626594.html > accessed 19 July 2025.
14 Dr Peter Hammond, ‘Magna Carta – The First Bill of Rights’ (RealHistoryResources.org, 18 October 2024) <https://www.realhistoryresources.org/articles/magna-carta-the-first-bill
ofrights#:~:text=Magna%20Carta%2C%20signed%20by%20King%20John%20at%20Runnymede%2C,a%20fair% 20trial%20by%20a%20jury%20of%20> accessed 19 July 2025.
15 The Law Society of England and Wales, ‘Access Denied? LASPO four years on: A Law Society Review’ (June 2017).
16 McDonald’s Corporation v Steel and Morris [1997] EWHC QB 366.
17 Steel and Morris v United Kingdom [2005] ECHR 68416/01.
18Kate Allman, ‘A profession for the wealthy? The enduring problem for diversity in law’ (LSJ Online, 01 December 2020)< https://lsns.wpengine.com/articles/a-profession-for-the-wealthy-the-enduring-problem-for-diversity-in-law/? > accessed 19 July 2025.
19 Dr Andrew Francis Taylor and Hilary Sommerlad, ‘Access to legal work experience and its role in the (re)production of legal professional identity’ (Taylor & Francis Online, 24 November 2009) <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09695950903204961?> accessed 19 July 2025.
20 Harvard Law School, ‘Inequality in Lawyers’ Careers’ (Center on the Legal Professional, July/August 2024) <https://clp.law.harvard.edu/knowledge-hub/magazine/issues/building-lawyers-careers/inequality-in-lawyers careers/?> accessed 19 July 2025.
21 R v R [1992] 1 AC 599.
22 Plessy v Ferguson 163 US 537 (1896).
23 The Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association ‘Report by Special Rapporteur Maina Kiai’ (17 June 2013) UN Doc. A/HRC/23/39/Add.1.
24 Austin v United Kingdom (Application Nos 39692/09 40713/09 and 41008/09), [2012] Crim LR 544, 176 CL&J 225, (2012) Times, 26 March, 32 BHRC 618, [2012] ECHR 39692/09, [2012] All ER (D) 208 (Mar).
25 European Convention on Human Rights 1950, arts 5 and 10.
26 R (on the application of Laporte) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary (Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police and another interested parties), [2006] UKHL 55, [2007] 2 AC 105, [2007] 2 All ER 529, [2007] 2 WLR 46, [2007] 4 LRC 468, (2006) Times, 14 December, 22 BHRC 38, [2006] All ER (D) 172 (Dec).
27 European Convention on Human Rights 1950, art 11(1).
28 Zlata Rodionova, ‘Section 14: what public order act means for Extinction Rebellion after London protest was banned by police’ (The I Paper, 17 October 2019) <https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/section-14-public-order-act-extinction rebellion-london-protest-banned-explained 351123#:~:text=The%20Metropolitan%20Police%20have%20ordered%20Extinction%20Rebellion%20protesters,se ction%2014%20of%20the%20Public%20Order%20Act%201986.> accessed 19 July 2025.
29 Dominic Casciani, ‘Sarah Everard: What went wrong at the Clapham vigil?’ (BBC, 14 March 2021) <https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56394344> accessed 19 July 2025.
30 European Convention on Human Rights 1950, art 11(1).
31 Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022.
32 Dunja Mijatović, Commissioner for Human Rights, Report Following Her Visit to tThe United Kingdom from 27 June to 1 July 2022 (CommDH(2022)27, 2022) Council of Europe <https://rm.coe.int/report-on-the-visit-to-united kingdom-from-27-june-to-1-july-2022-by-d/1680a952a5%20clause%2015> accessed 19 July 2025.
33 Kate Allman, ‘A profession for the wealthy? The enduring problem for diversity in law’ (LSJ Online, 01 December 2020) < https://lsns.wpengine.com/articles/a-profession-for-the-wealthy-the-enduring-problem-for diversity-in-law/? > accessed 19 July 2025.
34 Suzi Ring, ‘Law firms forge new career paths in bid to tackle social mobility’ (Financial Times, 13 September 2024) < https://www.ft.com/content/c196e413-4101-4133-afb5-87dcc10781bc?> accessed 19 July 2025.
35 Kate Allman, ‘A profession for the wealthy? The enduring problem for diversity in law’ (LSJ Online, 01 December 2020) < https://lsns.wpengine.com/articles/a-profession-for-the-wealthy-the-enduring-problem-for diversity-in-law/? > accessed 19 July 2025.
36 Kate Allman, ‘A profession for the wealthy? The enduring problem for diversity in law’ (LSJ Online, 01 December 2020) < https://lsns.wpengine.com/articles/a-profession-for-the-wealthy-the-enduring-problem-for diversity-in-law/? > accessed 19 July 2025.
37 Suzi Ring, ‘Law firms forge new career paths in bid to tackle social mobility’ (Financial Times, 13 September 2024) < https://www.ft.com/content/c196e413-4101-4133-afb5-87dcc10781bc?> accessed 19 July 2025.
38 Kate Allman, ‘A profession for the wealthy? The enduring problem for diversity in law’ (LSJ Online, 01 December 2020) < https://lsns.wpengine.com/articles/a-profession-for-the-wealthy-the-enduring-problem-for diversity-in-law/? > accessed 19 July 2025.
