SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A coalition of lawmakers, public defenders and advocates gathered at the State Capitol this week to push for increased funding and structural reforms to California’s public defense system, warning that overwhelming caseloads, staffing shortages and resource disparities are undermining the constitutional right to counsel even as the Assembly unanimously passed ACR 159.
The resolution, authored by Assemblymember Ash Kalra, affirms the importance of indigent defense and calls for improved funding, staffing and institutional support for public defenders across the state. It comes alongside a broader budget request backed by the California Public Defenders Association seeking $15 million annually for three years to fund post-bar attorney positions in county offices.
“We are here because California is facing an escalating recruitment and retention crisis in public defense,” Kalra said at the press conference. “And it’s more important than ever, especially given what we’re seeing nationally, that we ensure that California sets the model as to what it means to have a judicial system that can be trusted. And you can’t do that without a public defense system that is supported.”
Kalra framed the issue as both constitutional and structural, pointing to longstanding disparities in funding between defense and prosecution. He argued that the right to counsel, established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1963, cannot be satisfied by mere appointment of an attorney without sufficient resources.
“Let’s be clear that the right to counsel cannot be satisfied just by the mere appointment of counsel if public defense attorneys are without adequate time and resources,” he said.
The press conference brought together chief public defenders from 18 counties, a show of statewide solidarity that Kalra described as unprecedented in his decade in the Legislature. The gathering underscored what advocates described as a system under severe strain, with high turnover, unfilled vacancies and caseloads that exceed ethical limits.
California is one of only two states that contributes virtually nothing to trial-level public defense, and 86 percent of chief public defenders report insufficient staffing to meet client needs.
Speakers repeatedly pointed to a structural imbalance in funding and resources that places public defenders at a disadvantage relative to prosecutors and law enforcement.
“Public defenders protect one of the most fundamental constitutional rights, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, and protecting that right means more than simply appointing an attorney,” said Ricardo Garcia, chief public defender of Los Angeles County. “It means ensuring that public defender operations are insulated from external pressures or interference that could compromise our independence or our client’s constitutional rights.”
Garcia added that funding disparities are not incidental but systemic. “Public defense offices across California do not receive the same level of federal, state, or grant funding as prosecutors or law enforcement,” he said. “Despite carrying this essential constitutional responsibility, our offices… continue to operate without parity in institutional resourcing.”
He described the situation as a threat not only to fairness but to constitutional protections themselves. “We cannot continue to expect public defenders across California to uphold constitutional rights while funding them at a fraction of what prosecutors and law enforcement receive,” Garcia said. “The disparity… puts human lives at risk. It threatens the Sixth Amendment.”
The funding proposal tied to ACR 159 would allocate $15 million annually over three years to support early-career attorneys entering public defense, a move proponents say is necessary to address recruitment challenges exacerbated by rising student debt and declining federal loan forgiveness programs.
“This funding request comes at a critical time amidst recent federal actions… that have eroded student loan repayment and forgiveness programs that once made public defense financially viable,” Kalra said.
Damon Silver, chief public defender of Santa Clara County, described the crisis as a system that disproportionately impacts poor communities and people of color while operating at a breaking point.
“We know that the criminal legal system in California targets the poor,” Silver said. “Eighty percent or more of the clients in the system in California require the services of public defenders because they are poor.”
He continued, “We know the criminal legal system targets communities of color… We know the criminal legal system targets the accused, not the convicted. Seventy percent of the people in our statewide county jails are awaiting trial and presumed innocent.”
Silver argued that the current moment represents a tipping point.
“In reality, public defense services have been in crisis since day one… but now we are at a breaking point,” he said. “We need appropriate and reliable resources to meet this crisis.”
Other speakers highlighted the human consequences of underfunding, including delays in representation, overworked attorneys and systemic inequities.
April Grayson of Sister Warriors described the system as fundamentally imbalanced.
“A constitutional right to a lawyer is a hollow promise if that lawyer is too buried in paperwork to even see your face,” she said.
She added that under-resourced defense contributes to broader patterns of injustice.
“For too long, I’ve watched the scales of justice be weighted towards prosecution and policing with billions poured into the machinery of conviction while our defenders are left to survive on crumbs,” Grayson said.
Grayson sees ACR 159 as a step toward correcting those imbalances.
“ACR 159 is a critical tool for our liberation because it demands that public defenders have the same access to investigators, experts and time that the state uses to build cases against us,” she said.
The issue of caseloads continues to be a central concern especially in light of what took place in April in San Francisco, with public defenders describing workloads that make effective representation difficult or impossible.
Manohar Raju, chief public defender of San Francisco, offered such an illustration.
“If you had a loved one who was facing charges and you went to an attorney and they said, ‘Well, I can work on your case, but I got a dozen more…’ you’d hesitate,” he said.
He continued, “Imagine if it wasn’t a dozen… but five dozen… ‘I’m not really going to be working on your case… until a couple of years.’ And that’s what we’ve normalized in our society.”
Raju described the consequences for both clients and attorneys.
“It’s literally an unsustainable job,” he said. “Even if we can do a great job, it’s not timely… we’re always triaging and it’s unfair to our clients and it’s unfair for our staff.”
Speakers also argued that the crisis extends beyond attorneys to the broader defense infrastructure, including investigators, social workers and support staff.
Assemblymember Sade Elhawary highlighted the broader social impact, particularly in communities heavily affected by policing and incarceration.
“It is unfair that the state does not fund public defense at the same rate as prosecution, and we overfund oftentimes law enforcement,” she said.
She added that inadequate defense resources can erode public trust. “When defense counsel doesn’t have enough funding, it leads to burnout… it often erodes trust in the system, and we can’t allow that,” Elhawary said.
Supporters of ACR 159 argue that the resolution and accompanying funding proposal are necessary first steps toward addressing systemic inequities that have persisted for decades.
The press release noted that similar crises have emerged in other states, including Washington and Oregon, and cited rising caseloads and staffing shortages in jurisdictions across California.
Advocates also pointed to investigative reporting documenting the lack of defense investigators and the use of flat-fee contracts that can discourage thorough representation.
Assemblymember Kalra sees the effort as both a policy and moral imperative.
“California has had a longstanding commitment to the principle that justice must not depend on wealth, status, or access to private resources,” he said.
He added, “In this time, we act on not just the constitutional obligation, but our moral responsibility to ensure that public defender offices are adequately funded, staffed and capable of providing effective representation.”
While ACR 159 itself is a resolution and does not allocate funding, supporters say its unanimous passage signals growing recognition within the Legislature of the need for reform.
“This is a small step we can do to accomplish just that,” said Assemblymember Nick Schultz. “It’s easy to say you believe in the constitution, but now more than ever, we need to actually fight for it.”
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
