Bench diversity efforts leave out some groups

I read with interest the letter by the governor's press secretary, Evan Westrup, about the article, "Despite push for diverse bench, nonwhite judicial applicants still lagging" (April 29). Not surprisingly, the press secretary responds citing statistics and that the article "ignores important strides that have been made to diversify the bench in California." Unfortunately, a closer look at recent statistics released by the governor's office paint a much different story on diversity in judicial appointments.

In 2013, the state Legislature passed Assembly Bill 1005 requiring data collection on judicial appointments to include demographic data on disability and veteran status. The Assembly Floor Analysis for AB 1005 noted it was enacted "that the judiciary should more closely reflect the diverse population of California, which includes the disabled and veterans." Statistics released in 2014 show that 229 people applied for appointment, 93 females and 136 males. A total of 76 applicants were appointed, 28 females and 48 males. Thus, 33 percent of applicants were appointed.

There were three disabled applicants; none were appointed. There were 10 veteran applicants; none were appointed. Apparently, only one name of those was sent to the Commission on Judicial Nominee Evaluation. The most under represented group in the legal profession is the disabled, according to the National Association of Law Placement.

When the disabled and other diverse groups (LGBT lawyers, etc.) are not included in diversity discussions, the impact is obvious. The implicit bias against them permeates the practice of law and the courts. They have no seat at the table to seek redress for historic discrimination that they have been subjected to. All impacted groups need to be included and properly evaluated for appointment.

Dorothy's sage comment from the "Wizard of Oz" was, "This doesn't look like Kansas anymore" springs to mind. Let's keep the seats at the table open for all impacted groups which will require courage to admit more needs to be done to ensure diversity on the bench rather than defending the status quo.