Access to justice is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy and an enduring challenge in societies marked by structural inequality. In the Philippines, where the cost of legal services remains prohibitive for many citizens, law schools have become critical sites for extending justice beyond the courtroom. This study examines the doctrinal foundations of the Clinical Legal Education Program (CLEP) and argues that the obligation of law schools to provide supervised legal aid is not merely pedagogical or voluntary but a binding legal duty derived from constitutional, statutory, and judicial authority. Using the doctrinal method, the research systematically analyzes the hierarchy of legal norms that underpin this obligation. It interprets the constitutional guarantee of access to justice under Articles II and XIII of the 1987 Constitution in conjunction with the Supreme Court’s regulatory power under Article VIII, Section 5(5). These constitutional principles are operationalized through Republic Act No. 7662 (Legal Education Reform Act of 1993), Rule 138-A of the Rules of Court, and Administrative Matter No. 19-03-24-SC, which institutionalizes CLEP as a prerequisite for Bar admission. The 2023 Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) further reinforces this framework by embedding access to justice as an ethical and professional obligation. The study concludes that clinical legal education in the Philippines represents a juridically complete model where education, ethics, and justice delivery converge. It situates law schools as constitutional actors in democratizing access to justice and shaping socially responsible lawyers. By grounding social responsibility in enforceable legal norms, the Philippine CLEP offers a replicable model for developing democracies seeking to align legal education with constitutional commitments to equality and justice.