Despite push for diverse bench, nonwhite judicial applicants still lagging

By America Hernandez

Daily Journal Staff Writer

Despite Gov. Jerry Brown's renewed commitment to build a judiciary that reflects California's
diverse communities, California's 1,655 sitting judges remain 70 percent white as
of the end of 2014 - nearly unchanged since 2007, when the state began tracking the
demographic data.

That lack of racial balance on the bench has prompted bar associations and Los Angeles
County Superior Court, the largest trial court in the nation, to hold seminars aimed
at demystifying the application process in hopes that more minority lawyers will be
encouraged to submit themselves for consideration.

The Mexican American Bar Association, in partnership with the John M. Langston Bar
Association, are hosting a joint informational session on how to become a judge on
June 23 at Loyola Law School. L.A. Superior hosted a similar workshop earlier this
month, as did the Bar Assocation of San Francisco in November.

The main speaker at most of these events is Joshua Groban, Brown's senior advisor
for policy and appointments. "I see a lot of potential candidates with diverse backgrounds
wringing their hands, delaying their applications or wondering whether they are worthy,"
Groban said in an interview. "If you've thought long and hard about it, and in particular
if you have peers, experienced lawyers and judges, telling you that you are ready
and that you should apply, apply! We want your application!"

Data from the governor's office shows that the number of nonwhite lawyers applying
for judgeships has lagged behind their Caucasian counterparts in recent years. Nonwhites
made up 38 percent of total applicants last year, compared to a high of 54 percent
in 2007.

In 2006, then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation requiring an annual report
to be published on the demographics of all judicial applicants and eventual appointees.
AB 159 also created 50 new judgeships, which Schwarzenegger paired with a very vocal
mission to diversify the bench.Â

The following year, L.A. Superior Court held its first diversity summit with panels
on how to navigate the application process. The number of minority applicants in California
surged to 222 lawyers in 2007, surpassing white applicants for the first and last
time since such data has been available.

Some ethnicities on the bench more closely match the population than others, a longstanding
goal of the Judicial Council. But one group continues to be underrepresented: Hispanic
lawyers made up just 9 percent of sitting judges and of the judicial applicant pool
last year, while 40 percent of California residents are Latino.

Criminal defense attorney Richard M. Chacon, who is a member of the Mexican American
Bar Association and who's been urged by colleagues to apply for a judgeship, said
that much of the reticence can be psychological.

"If you've already exceeded your family's expectations, you have to have to be very
very driven to become a judge," he said. "To me that application process is really
daunting. The only reason I'd even consider it is because I want to balance the bench."

San Diego County Superior Court Judge Sharon B. Majors-Lewis, who was Schwarzenegger's
judicial appointments secretary from 2007 to 2010, acknowledged that many minority
lawyers may worry they don't have right connections or credentials to stand out during
the evaluation process.

"From many thousands of interviews I had with people over four years, many of them
shared the same concern that it had always been political and who you know - not what
you can do, and what Ivy League you went to and who you can help," she said.

To combat this, Majors-Lewis interviewed every judicial candidate that received a
qualified rating from the State Bar's Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation,
or JNE Commission, whether that rating was at the low or high end of the scale.

"That's when I'd see for myself who were the real stars, maybe on paper not so much,
but better in real life," Majors-Lewis said. "I can say in all honesty that in most
of our appointments politics was the last consideration, even though everyone in politics
wanted it to be the first."

Majors-Lewis acknowledged that there once was a time when an application was expected
to come along with recommendation letters from influential members in a county's legal
community, or trusted confidantes of an administration.

But Groban said that he cares most about the passion that shows up in a candidate's
statement on why he or she wants to be a judge, and what opposing counsel or judges
say about that lawyer's drive and commitment to justice. The application has changed
over the years to allow a breadth of practice areas to shine, as well as space for
additional law-related activities such as participation in bar associations, community
service, and the like.

"We are looking for excellence in whatever legal endeavor he or she has chosen to
pursue," Groban said.

Helen Zukin, a partner at Kiesel Law LLP and former JNE commissioner, reminded attendees
at the recent L.A. Superior workshop that the vast majority of appointments are people
the governor does not know, and that the commission evaluations are relied upon heavily.

"I train the new commissioners every year on how to analyze the confidential comment
forms, about how if it's criticism it has to be both substantial and credible, and
what that means," Zukin said. "One of the things I talk about is how we all have to
privately examine our own biases that we may not be aware of [about what the ideal
judge looks like in our mind] and own up to them, so that it doesn't creep in to the
evaluation of a candidate."

But ultimately, Groban and Majors-Lewis both acknowledged, the judicial appointments
are a product of the candidate pool.

"The governor can only appoint you if you've applied," Groban said.

href="mailto:america_hernandez@dailyjournal.com">america_hernandez@dailyjournal.com

<!-- Despite push for diverse bench, nonwhite judicial applicants still lagging -->