Posted on 04/08/2007 1:50:24 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
As early as this week, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will appoint a new judge to one of the state's 58 trial courts – and begin seizing an unprecedented opportunity to leave a lasting mark on the state judiciary.
Legislation passed last year empowers Schwarzenegger to appoint 50 new judges beginning this month and 100 more in the coming years. These are positions the judiciary says are needed to meet growing demands on trial and appellate courts.
The seats are newly created, not replacements for retired or departed judges. Never before has a California governor been given such a chance to affect the composition of the state's bench.
The specter of all these appointments has provoked close scrutiny of the state judiciary, and increased pressure on the governor for his appointments to reflect more closely the population's racial and gender makeup.
“This is an opportunity for him to leave a legacy of diversity,” said Lilia Garcia, a lawyer who tracks judicial appointments for the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association. “We would hope he won't miss that opportunity.”
California has the nation's largest court system and one of its most diverse populations.
But a recent report – one of three demographic surveys required as part of the legislation that authorized the additional judges – shows the judiciary is overwhelmingly white and male.
Of 1,598 judges on trial courts, appellate courts and the state Supreme Court who responded to a survey, 73 percent are men, according to the state Administrative Office of the Courts.
Seventy percent are white. Latinos make up 6 percent of the bench; Asians and African-Americans account for 4 percent.
By comparison, 43 percent of California residents are white, 35 percent Hispanic, 12 percent Asian and 6 percent African-American.
Data for San Diego County, which has the state's second-largest Superior Court after Los Angeles, with 128 judges, parallel state totals. However, those figures could be skewed by the 20.5 percent of judges who did not to respond to the survey.
The available data showed that 66 percent of local Superior Court judges are white, 5 percent Latino, 3.9 percent Asian and 3 percent African-American.
The county's population is 52 percent white, 30 percent Latino, 10 percent Asian and 5 percent African-American.
Selection debate
The need for new judges was pushed by state Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George, especially for the fast-growing areas of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. Democrats in the Legislature, led by Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, initially balked at funding the new slots because Schwarzenegger has appointed too few minorities to the bench. The agreement to collect demographic data on the courts in return for funding 50 slots was a first. The Legislature will have to approve funding for the 100 additional positions annually.
The agreement also required reports from the governor on the number of minority candidates who apply for judgeships. And the State Bar of California's Judicial Nominees Evaluation commission, which rates candidates' qualifications, was required to break down those ratings by gender and ethnicity.
A Schwarzenegger spokeswoman said that of the 213 appointments he has made since 2003, 41, or 19 percent, are minorities. Critics, such as the La Raza Lawyers, said that is not enough.
Schwarzenegger argues that his appointments are more diverse than the membership of the state bar, the pool from which judges are chosen. The bar's data show it is about 4 percent Latino, 5.4 percent Asian and 1.7 percent African-American.
The debate over the numbers is forcing a look at how judges are selected.
While some judges are initially elected, most are appointed by the governor in a lengthy process that is largely secret. (All state judges must stand for election after they are appointed.)
Playing a key role is the governor's judicial appointments secretary, former San Diego prosecutor Sharon Majors-Lewis, an African-American woman, whom Schwarzenegger appointed earlier this year in the wake of the controversy.
To be considered for the bench, candidates must fill out a detailed application. Then they are vetted by groups of local lawyers and judges, known as Judicial Selection Advisory Committees.
The committee membership is confidential, Majors-Lewis said, to shield members from attempts to influence their recommendations. They do not contact the candidate, but instead speak to people in the legal community about the candidate.
“The theory is the local committees know people who know people, and by talking to all those people, they can gain information on whether the candidate will be a good jurist,” Majors-Lewis said.
But Fredericka McGee, legal counsel to Núñez, contends the secrecy is not needed. McGee was integral in crafting the compromise legislation that secured funding for the 50 new judges in exchange for the mandatory demographic reports on the judiciary.
The secret committees, she said, cater to insiders.
“These committees are people who have a lot of power to vet candidates. At some point they should be publicly accountable, and then the whole process would be more accountable,” she said.
Value of diversity
If the local committee approves, the candidate is formally screened by the Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission. That commission, which includes members from San Diego, forwards recommendations to the governor.
One judicial candidate, who declined to be named because of the political nature of the application process, complained that the local committees function as a kind of Star Chamber. Applicants know they are being researched and have no way to rebut what is being said about them, the lawyer said.
Garcia said the La Raza lawyers have pushed for more transparency. While many people who spend lots of time in the courthouses know who the power brokers are, equally qualified lawyers whose work does not take them to court as often are out of the loop and put at a disadvantage, she said.
Other critics complain that the selection process favors prosecutors. Applications for judicial appointments emphasize trial experience, Garcia said. The local review committees are also staffed with prosecutors and law enforcement officials, though defense lawyers are part of the process.
In San Diego, the trial bench is heavily salted with former prosecutors. An analysis of judicial biographies showed half of the 128 judges now serving are former prosecutors either in the state or federal system.
Robert Fellmeth, a law professor at the University of San Diego School of Law, said diversity for judges should include diversity of experience. “There are public defenders, civil lawyers, public interest lawyers who get overlooked,” he said.
In an effort to address that, the application that candidates fill out is being revised, Majors-Lewis said. The new form, which has not been completed, is expected to include nontrial experience, such as mediation or arbitration, as well as other disciplines such as administrative law or family law.
Majors-Lewis said those changes could draw a broader array of applicants, which could mean a more diverse bench.
George, who as chief justice is also the chief executive of the court system, said diversity on the bench is important because it helps “reinforce the important message that ours is a system open to all, and that individuals drawn from any segment of society can preside fairly and objectively” in civil and criminal cases.
Lei-Chala Wilson, president of the Earl B. Gilliam Bar Association for African-American lawyers in San Diego, echoed that sentiment.
“It's not just justice, it's the appearance of justice,” she said. “When people see people who look like them on the bench, it helps give them confidence in the civil justice system and criminal justice system.”
The seats are newly created, not replacements for retired or departed judges. Never before has a California governor been given such a chance to affect the composition of the state’s bench.
You want to make a real effort to ensure a healthier state’s future for all, and not just illegals and the Rainbow folks and libs, here’s a prime chance, Gub.
It’s a FRee shot, even.
What will he do?
I don’t predict a GOOD (R) outcome for this.
I'd guess 25% Republican appointments, maximum.
I have not kept up with all of Arnold’s judicial appointments, but every one I have heard about was a left-wing whacko. This is going to be a disaster, IMHO.
If he did nothing but climbed in a cave and only proposed 2-3 % year hikes in the budgets, and stopped this obsession with being everyone’s Gub including illegals and the rest of the GW crowd, he would serve the state better, imo, than he is now.
Who cares what those on the opposition party side of things say? They’ll get their turn someday,, but to toss this golden opportunity to stack the deck and legally for a lot of years away and go “Post-Partisan”, not good, and can only confirm how much he really does care about the state, or more about who controls its gubamint at the end of the day..
Socialists translation of diversify means select a socialist.
Surprisingly, the number is or was much higher his forst couple of years,, then he caved like an old beer can.. He can still veto the stuff he vetoed before and credit to him for that at least but this is no time to go down the partisan road, we see what dems&libs do and to only further ingrain them into places like the courts as well as universities and colleges, well.. nuff said
I think his WIFE has way more say in what he does than is good for the state and country.
Think Hillary!
Arnie is so far up the dems ass there is no way he is going to place conservatives on that bench.
Ya have to be kidding.
Besides he is so much a RINO it is a joke, also there is Maria Skelator his wife the Kennedy.
Whatever the percentage turns out to be, it’s at least a good bet that Arnold will appoint more Republicans than Rudy did, faint praise though that may be.
Think Hillary!
—
LOL.. as frail as Maria looks, I doubt any ashtray she tosses at him will do much to make a dent in aRnie’s thick skull... but behind closed doors, all bets are off.
Arghhh. When are things going to be “bad enough” here??
I suppose Nunez et al want diversity in immigration status too?
I don’t care about the color of their skins. I care about the content of their characters.
This is just too dangerous —
As per usual, our Governator will now consult the Democrat leaders of the California Senate and the California Assembly, intensely negotiate with them over the selection of the persons to fill those new judicial positions, and then he will go ahead and make the appointments that the Democrats told him that he was going to have to make in the first place.
Since Arnold has interpreted the job of governor to “make Californians happy” and to “compromise as necessary”, you can count on Arnold appointing a bunch of limp-wristed socialist-progressive-commie-sympathizing-environmental-whacko-feminist-loving judges. But please don’t call this “leadership”. As Rush would say: we can’t blame it on his wife anymore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.