This subject is something of a revelation to me as I’ve spent over ten years pursuing an evolving legal case without counsel, and almost every action has been summarily dismissed using what I now call collectively “gatekeeper” devices.

I have not yet thoroughly read the UCLA Law Review Article, but I expect to find no evidence that the authors considered that judges, and other members of the legal establishment, have an implicit bias against self-represented persons who appear before our tribunals and in our courts, and especially when they are facing parties represented by counsel.

Looking at my own now fairly extensive experience I can say that for this bias there is compelling evidence, the most notable example of which for me was a hearing conducted (but apparently not recorded) by three justices of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in 2003:

http://courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/ca/03/06/2003bcca0605.htm

I subsequently discovered in another law journal (and I note it is still not readily accessible to the public) the text of a speech given by the author of that judgment to the members of the B.C. Council of Administrative Tribunals in 1999. The title was “Know Thyself: Some Thoughts About Impartiality of Individual Decision-makers From an Interested Observer”. I note she said “Interested”, not “Disinterested”, and in my view the speech amply demonstrates that indeed she was very “interested” – in the sense of biased.