As housing has become increasingly unaffordable for US renters, an access to justice crisis has emerged in local eviction courts. Millions of tenants face eviction without legal counsel each year, typically against landlords who are represented by an attorney. In response to calls from access to justice scholars and legal advocates, 25 jurisdictions have recently authorized right to counsel programs that provide legal assistance to tenants facing an eviction. While extant research has documented the many benefits of legal aid for housing-insecure tenants, less attention has been paid to the experiences of tenants who are unable to access legal counsel when it is offered.

This Article reports the findings of a mixed methods empirical study of the nation’s first statewide right to counsel program in Washington State. In doing so, we make three primary contributions. First, we draw on the theoretical framework of administrative burden to elucidate the barriers that evicted tenants face in their pursuit of legal aid. We analyze qualitative data from interviews with tenants who were initially unable to access legal assistance and show that eviction proceedings exact learning, compliance, and psychological costs on prospective participants. We further demonstrate that tenants frequently endure traumatic experiences that strain their cognitive resources and may impede their efforts to contact a legal aid provider.

Second, we show that many tenants are still evicted without representation nearly three years after the implementation of Washington’s groundbreaking law. We analyze quantitative data from 970 unlawful detainer proceedings in Washington and identify predictors of tenants’ legal representation. Our analysis shows that two local rules intended to reduce default judgments against tenants are associated with lower default rates, but have not measurably increased tenant representation rates. Instead, we find that tenants’ submission of a written response to the eviction summons is a strong predictor of access to legal representation. We also add to the body of evidence that shows improved case outcomes for represented tenants. Taken together, our findings suggest that interventions focused on marginally increasing compliance burdens for landlords do not meaningfully increase tenants’ access to justice.

Finally, we argue that policymakers should apply lessons from research on the criminal legal system to increase tenants’ participation in right to counsel programs. While right to counsel programs have dramatically improved rates of legal representation across jurisdictions, additional reforms are needed to ensure more comprehensive provision of legal aid. Right to counsel laws are a promising first step, but policymakers should further consider reforms that reduce the learning, compliance, and psychological costs of accessing legal aid by improving clarity of court communications, mitigating logistical complexity, and creating more flexibility for tenants who intend to participate in the legal process.