Nowicki and Laird also requested declaratory relief with respect to their constitutional claims. Such relief is not barred by sovereign or judicial immunity. We decline to delve into these jurisdictional issues in this case. Although jurisdictional issues are normally resolved prior to a determination of the merits, . . . Every person who appears as agent, representative or attorney, for or on behalf of any other person, or any firm, partnership, association or corporation in or before any court of record, court commissioner, or judicial tribunal of the United States, or of any state, or who otherwise, in or out of court, for compensation or pecuniary reward gives professional legal advice not incidental to his or her usual or ordinary business, or renders any legal service for any other person, or any firm, partnership, association or corporation, shall be deemed to be practicing law within the meaning of this section.
States have a compelling interest in the practice of professions within their boundaries.
The legal profession is one of the professions most closely related to the State's power to protect the public, and it plays an important role in the administration of justice. Since the clients may have difficulty in gauging the relative legal skills of professional representative and the goals of judicial efficiency and economy are enhanced by competent legal representation, legislatures have attempted to assure quality by imposing and enforcing licensing requirements, as well as through other means. There are many means of providing indigents with adequate access to the courts. This right does not compel Wisconsin to waive its prohibition of the practice of law for compensation without a license as the solution. Laymen have the First Amendment right of freedom to associate with licensed attorneys to pursue a legal objective, but only if they can show that the deprivation will deprive them of meaningful access to the courts.