State Bar of California
Download
1 / 45

State Bar of California Council on Access & Fairness - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 95 Views
  • Uploaded on

State Bar of California Council on Access & Fairness. Beauty and the Bench: The Judicial Perspective. Panelists: Hon. Brenda Harbin-Forte , A lameda County Superior Court Chair, Judicial Committee, State Bar Council on Access & Fairness

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'State Bar of California Council on Access & Fairness' - lynne


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

Beauty and the Bench: The Judicial Perspective

Panelists:

Hon. Brenda Harbin-Forte , Alameda County Superior Court

Chair, Judicial Committee, State Bar Council on Access & Fairness

Hon. Erica Yew, Santa Clara County Superior Court

Hon. Robert Tafoya, Kern County Superior Court

Hon. Kevin McCarthy, San Francisco County Superior Court

Fredericka McGee, Esq., General Counsel, Office of the Speaker, Assemblymember John A. Perez

Moderator:

Christine Noma, Esq., Partner, Wendel, Rosen, Black & Dean, LLP

California Minority Corporate Counsel Program

September 30, 2010 – San Francisco


State bar of california council on access fairness

Note: All Access & Fairness activities are funded through voluntary contributions to the State Bar.

No mandatory attorney dues are used for these activities.

(Keller and Brosterhous Limitations)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

FIRST, A WORD FROM OUR SPONSOR:


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

2020 Projections for California


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

Racial/Ethnic Minorities in the Professions in California


State bar of california council on access fairness

2001 Survey

2006 Survey

2004 CA

Census

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

Categories

Active Bar Members

148,000

154,500

Race/Ethnic Minorities

African American

2.4%

1.7%

6%

Latino/Hispanic

3.7%

3.8%

35%

Asian/Pacific Is.

6.0%

5.3%

12%

Other/Mixed

4.9%

4.8%

3.6%

Total Minorities

17.0%

15.6%

56.6%

Women

32.0%

34.0%

50.7%

LGBT

2.4%

5.2%

2.1%

Disabilities

4.0%

No data

17.4%

California State Bar Diversity


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

Race/Ethnicity Statistics


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

Gender Statistics


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

LGBT Statistics

*** Statistics not available


State bar of california council on access fairness

Attorney Demographics in the Private Sector vs. Large Firms

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


Why value judicial diversity
WHY VALUE JUDICIAL DIVERSITY? Firms

“In my view, a diverse bench not only will maintain and enhance our state’s tradition of having an excellent judiciary, but also will serve to reinforce our guiding principle – that we are committed to making our justice system fair and accessible to all.

Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Welcoming remarks, “Continuing a Legacy of Excellence: A Summit on Diversity in the Judiciary”, June 2006, San Jose, CA, convened by the State Bar

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


Why value judicial diversity1
WHY VALUE JUDICIAL DIVERSITY? Firms

“When you recognize that, in the United States, it is the ability to petition our courts for fairness that keeps people from seeking justice in the streets, then you understand that diversity in the legal profession is critical for democracy to survive.”

Judge Dennis Archer (Ret.), Past ABA president

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


Why value judicial diversity2
WHY VALUE JUDICIAL DIVERSITY? Firms

“The benefits of a judiciary that is diverse go beyond the symbolic. We require jury pools to be representative of the community not just because it reduces the perception of bias, but because it reduces the actual opportunity for bias. The benefits that accrue from having 12 diverse viewpoints on a jury are similarly present when it comes to diversity on the bench….”Editorial, American Judicature Society Magazine,

March/April 2010 ed.

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


Why value judicial diversity3
WHY VALUE JUDICIAL DIVERSITY? Firms

“…Judges can and do influence each other. They exchange ideas on and off the bench. A judiciary that is comprised of judges from differing backgrounds and experiences leads to an interplay and exchange of divergent viewpoints, which in turn prevents bias, and leads to better, more informed decision making. Diversity of opinion among decision makers encourages debate and reflection, and fosters a deliberative process that leads to an end product that is greater than the sum of its parts.“ Editorial, American Judicature Society Magazine,

March/April 2010 ed.

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


State bar of california council on access fairness

Supreme Court Firms

Total 7 Seats

42.8% Ethnic Diversity (3 seats)*

(As of December 31, 2009)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

African American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Latino

Male

Female

Female

Male

Female

Male

0

0

1

1

0

1

Diversity in the California Courts

* Compiled by COAF Judiciary Committee


State bar of california council on access fairness

Courts of Appeal Firms

Total 105 Seats

11.4% Ethnic Diversity (12 seats)*

(As of December 31, 2009)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

African American

Asian/Pacific Islander

Latino

Male

Female

Female

Male

Female

Male

0

4

2

2

2

2

Diversity in the California Courts

* Compiled by COAF Judiciary Committee


State bar of california council on access fairness

Superior Courts Firms

1593 Funded Judgeships (1643 Authorized)

20.3% Ethnic Diversity (323 seats) *

(As of December 31, 2009)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

African American

(97)

Asian/Pacific Islander

(92)

Latino

(134)

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

48

64

98

49

28

36

Diversity in the California Courts

* Compiled by COAF Judiciary Committee


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Diversity in the California Courts

Note: From the Judicial Council’s 2010 annual SB56 report. The remaining 8.5% of the bench fall into the categories of “American Indian”, “More Than One Race”, “Some Other Race”, or “Information Not Provided”. The report shows that 60 judges provided no information on ethnicity. If one assumes that 73.6% of those 60 judges are Caucasian, an additional 44 Caucasian judges would be added to the 1200 self-identified ones, for a total of 1244 Caucasian judges. This results in a representation of 76.3%, as opposed to the lower 73.6% figure in the JC’s Annual Report. The percentages of African American, Asian Pacific Islander, and Latino judges would also increase slightly if representative percentages of the non-responding group are factored in.


Why population and not bar memberhip
WHY POPULATION AND NOT BAR MEMBERHIP Firms

Goal 1 of the California Judicial Council’s strategic plan is to achieve a judicial branch that “will reflect the diversity of the state’s residents.” Access to justice issue.

“I strongly believe that any judge should be able to fairly hear and decide any case, no matter who the parties and regardless of the racial, ethnic, religious, economic or other minority group to which they belong. Nevertheless, it cannot be questioned that a bench that includes members of the various communities served by the courts will help instill confidence in every segment of the public that the courts are indeed open to all persons and will fairly consider everyone’ claims.” California Chief Justice Ronald M. George, 2007 remarks to Senate Judiciary Committee’s Public Hearing on the Judicial Selection Process

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


Why population and not bar memberhip1
WHY POPULATION AND NOT BAR MEMBERHIP Firms

Lawyers don’t own cases, causes of actions, claims – CLIENTS DO

CLIENTS come from the general population

Lawyers want fair results for CLIENTS

Explosion of self-represented litigants who come from the general population

“PUBLIC” trust and confidence = “general population” trust and confidence in our court system

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Ethnic Diversity – All Courts – YE 2009

Source: Judicial Council 2010 Annual SB56 Report


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Ethnic Diversity - Courts of Appeal - YE 2009

Source: Judicial Council 2010 Annual SB56 Report


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Ethnic - Superior Courts – YE 2009

Source: Judicial Council 2010 Annual SB56 Report


San francisco bay area dec 2009
San Francisco Bay Area Dec 2009 Firms

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


Central valley dec 2009
Central Valley - Dec 2009 Firms

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Southern California - Dec 2009


The case for gender diversity
THE CASE FOR GENDER DIVERSITY Firms

Juror in contempt for not disclosing H’s occupation, but male jurors not asked W’s occupation

Lowered bail – convicted rapist-DV case using knife-allowing Def to be reunited w/ dog would “cool his temper”

Insisted attorney use her husband’s surname in court, though she had retained birth name

“Rules are like women – made to be violated”

Rape victim was “coyote ugly”


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Gender – All Courts—YE 2009

1,631 Sitting Judges

(29.2%)

(70.8%)

Source: Judicial Council 2010 Annual SB56 Report


California courts gender ye 2009
California Courts Gender YE 2009 Firms

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

Diversity in the California Courts by Gender –

YE 2009 (Raw Numbers)


The potential pool eligible for judicial appointment passed bar between 1979 and 2000
THE POTENTIAL POOL FirmsEligible for Judicial Appointment (passed bar between 1979 and 2000)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


The potential pool who qualifies the qualified
THE POTENTIAL POOL- WHO QUALIFIES THE QUALIFIED? Firms

Informally: The Governor’s Judicial Selection Advisory Committees (aka “Secret Committees”)

Membership, including diversity thereof, not known or made public, criteria used to evaluate candidates not known or made public, methods of investigating candidates not known or made public

Formally: State Bar’s Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation (“aka “Jenny” Commission”)

Membership, including diversity thereof, is known and made public, published criteria for evaluating candidates, broad input from all stakeholders, members receive bias training and cultural sensitivity training.

State Bar of California

Council Access & Fairness


The potential pool who qualifies the qualified1
THE POTENTIAL POOL- WHO QUALIFIES THE QUALIFIED? Firms

Formally: Local and Minority Bar Judicial Appointments Evaluation Committees

-- Appointments through bar association policies and protocols: membership,

including diversity thereof, is known and made public; specific criteria for evaluating candidates

State Bar of California

Council Access & Fairness


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Firms

Council on Access & Fairness

The Potential Pool -- Ethnic Applications and “JNE” Commission Evaluations 2006-2009


The potential pool jne ratings by ethnicity 2006 2009 raw numbers
The Potential Pool -- JNE Ratings by Ethnicity 2006 - 2009 (raw numbers)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California (raw numbers)

Council on Access & Fairness

Ethnic Diversity of Appointments January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2009

* Diversity information compiled by COAF


The potential pool jne ratings by gender 2006 2009 raw numbers
The Potential Pool -- JNE Ratings by Gender 2006 - 2009 (raw numbers)

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


The potential pool applications and appointments by gender 2006 2009
The Potential Pool – Applications and Appointments by Gender - 2006-2009

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness

Sources: Applications –Governor’s annual SB 56 reports; Forwarded –JNE’s annual SB 56 reports;

Ratings – JNE’s annual SB 56 reports; Appointed – COAF


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Gender - 2006-2009

Council on Access & Fairness

Gender Diversity of Appointments January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2009

* Diversity information compiled by COAF


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Gender - 2006-2009

Council on Access & Fairness

Diversity in the California Courts

*Data compiled by the by the Courts Working Group of the State Bar’s Diversity Pipeline Task Force for the June 2006 Summit on Diversity in the Judiciary.


State bar of california council on access fairness

State Bar of California Gender - 2006-2009

Council on Access & Fairness

Gender Diversity in the Courts


How to increase judicial diversity
HOW TO INCREASE Gender - 2006-2009JUDICIAL DIVERSITY

Recruit and encourage minorities, women, LGBTs, attorneys with disabilities, etc, to apply

Push for better retirement system to attract more applicants

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


How to increase judicial diversity1
HOW TO INCREASE Gender - 2006-2009JUDICIAL DIVERSITY

Encourage more judicial mentoring programs – ACBA model

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


How to increase judicial diversity2
HOW TO INCREASE Gender - 2006-2009JUDICIAL DIVERSITY

Level the playing field by providing opportunities for women, minority, and LGBT judges, as well as judges with disabilities, etc., to sit on assignment on the appellate courts

State Bar of California

Council on Access & Fairness


How to increase judicial diversity3
HOW TO INCREASE Gender - 2006-2009JUDICIAL DIVERSITY

Educate public on importance of diversity, and provide status report on levels in communities

Encourage courts in each county to put on court-sponsored programs on how to become a judge

State Bar of California

Council Access & Fairness


Time for you to join the effort to increase judicial diversity
TIME FOR YOU TO JOIN THE EFFORT TO INCREASE JUDICIAL DIVERSITY?

“. . . It may well be that we will have to repent in this generation, not merely for the vitriolic words of the bad people and the violent actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence and indifference of the good people, who sit around and say ‘wait on time.’ Somewhere we must come to see that social progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and the persistent work of dedicated individuals, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the primitive forces of social stagnation. So we must help time. We must realize the time is always right to do right.”

Excerpt from address by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Auditorium, Stanford University, April 14, 1967

State Bar of California

Council Access & Fairness