IOLTA = ?
Plus, she seemed to be a believer in "root causes" for problems rather than personal responsibility.
Very "not good". That's classic social liberalism.
She's starting to sound more and more like a classic liberal in the mold of former mayor Kathryn J. Whitmire of Houston, about whom it was once said that she was a liberal who knew that her constituents were conservative, and yet was still a dedicated liberal "trying to do what she could".
For example, she went once a month down to the fern bars in Montrose to discuss her agenda and turn in her report card with the Gay Political Caucus -- this was in the 80's -- and tried to bum's-rush a "gay is OK" city ordinance through the council and into city law. One councilman stood up to her and managed to get a referendum called, and the voters stomped Whitmire's pet ordinance by 5:1. She knew how people felt, but she tried them on anyway. Thereafter the subject was radioactive for years until the Gay Cabal brought it up again under Mayor Lee Brown.
Put someone like that on the Supreme Court, and never mind Souter, you've got yourself another Earl Warren.
The Fifth Circuit in 2001 found that the Texas program violated the Fifth Amendment because the clients had a property interest in the interest generated by the IOLTA account and could not be taken by the State. However, in 2003, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision upheld a similar program from Washington State as a valid public use.
The IOLTA programs were a darling of the left to fund activist lawsuits in the name of the poor.