BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 182|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 182
Author: Corbett (D), et al
Amended: 4/12/11
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 3-2, 04/05/11
AYES: Evans, Corbett, Leno
NOES: Harman, Blakeslee
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-3, 05/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Emmerson, Runner
SUBJECT : Judiciary: demographic data
SOURCE : Equality California
DIGEST : This bill adds gender identity and sexual
orientation to the list of demographic data provided by
judicial applicants, nominees, appointees, justices, and
judges required to be collected and released by the
Governor, the Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation
(JNE Commission) of the State Bar, and the Administrative
Office of the Courts (AOC).
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides that in the event of a
vacancy in a judicial office to be filled by appointment of
the Governor, or when the Governor is required under the
Constitution to nominate a candidate, the Governor must
first submit the names of all potential appointees or
CONTINUED
SB 182
Page
2
nominees to a designated agency of the State Bar (the JNE
Commission) for evaluation of their judicial
qualifications. (Gov. Code Sec. 12011.5(a).)
Existing law requires that on or after March 1 every year,
all of the following shall occur:
1.The Governor shall collect and release the following
information on an aggregated statistical basis:
A. Demographic data provided by all judicial
applicants relative to ethnicity, race, and gender;
B. Demographic data relative to ethnicity, race, and
gender, as provided by all judicial applicants,
including both those whose names have been, and those
whose names have not been, submitted to the JNE
Commission for evaluation; and
C. Demographic data relative to ethnicity, race, and
gender, as provided by all judicial appointees or
nominees.
1.The JNE Commission shall collect and release the
following information on an aggregated statistical basis:
A. Statewide demographic data provided by all judicial
applicants reviewed regarding ethnicity, race, and
gender, and areas of legal practice and employment.
B. A statewide summary of recommendations by
ethnicity, race, and gender and areas of legal
practice and employment.
1.The Administrative Office of the Courts shall collect and
release demographic data provided by justices and judges
relative to ethnicity, race, and gender by specific
jurisdiction. (Gov. Code Sec. 12011.5(n).)
Existing law provides that the demographic data collected
from judicial applicants, nominees, and appointees shall be
disclosed only on an aggregated statistical basis and shall
not identify any individual applicant, justice, or judge.
(Gov. Code Sec. 12011.5(n)(3).)
CONTINUED
SB 182
Page
3
Existing law specifies that all communications with the
Governor or his or her authorized agents or employees and
to the State Bar in furtherance of the purposes of the law
relating to judicial offices are "absolutely privileged
from disclosure and confidential." (Gov. Code Sec.
12011.5(f).)
This bill adds gender identity and sexual orientation to
the list of self-reported demographic data required to be
collected and released by the Governor, the JNE Commission,
and the Administrative Office of the Courts. As under
existing law, providing the specified information would be
voluntary and any release of the data must be aggregated
statistical data and cannot identify any individual
applicant, justice, or judge.
This would also specifies that in the year following a
general or recall election in which a new Governor will
take office prior to March 1, the departing Governor must
provide to the incoming Governor all of the demographic
data collected for the previous year. This bill requires
that the incoming Governor is then responsible for
releasing that provided data as well as any demographic
data collected by the incoming Governor, if any, prior to
March 1.
This bill specifies that any demographic data disclosed or
released pursuant to this bill shall also indicate the
percentage of respondents who declined to respond.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13
2013-14 Fund
Additional demographic Up to $75 in one-time costs; $35
annually General*
data collection/release by ongoing
AOC
CONTINUED
SB 182
Page
4
Data collection/release by Minor, absorbable
costs General
JNE/Governor's Office
*Trial Court Trust Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/26/11)
Equality California (source)
Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom
California Judges Association
California Police Chiefs' Association
California National Organization for Women
California Employment Lawyers Association
Lambda Legal
National Center for Lesbian Rights
Sacramento Lawyers for the Equality of Gays and Lesbians
Honorable Betty Yee, Board of Equalization Member, First
District
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/26/11)
Capitol Resource Institute
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office:
This bill addresses a deficiency in current law by
including sexual orientation, gender identity, and
gender expression as a part of the collection of the
demographics collected. In the same vein as
then-Speaker Nunez's concern İfor] a lack of diversity
on the courts with regard to gender and ethnicity, the
collection of this self-reported information will help
identify diversity of sexual orientation or gender
identity and gender expression, or lack thereof.
The California Judiciary suffers from a substantial
lack of diversity. In 2009 women represented just 34
percent of applicants and only 28 percent of the total
number of judges appointed by the Governor. The
Administrative Office of the Courts reported that as
of December 2009 the judiciary was composed of 5%
Asian and Pacific Islanders, 5.4% Black/African
Americans, 7.5% Latinos, 73.6% Whites, 3.7% of more
CONTINUED
SB 182
Page
5
than one race, while 3.7% persons did not disclose
their race/ethnicity.
Equality California notes that "İb]ecause these reports do
not consider gender identity, gender expression, or sexual
orientation, there is currently no way of knowing how the
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community is
being represented in the judiciary. While LGBT people
represent a sizable and important part of the state, their
representation in the judicial branch of government is
virtually unknown."
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund supports the bill
and writes that "? a judiciary that accurately reflects the
diversity of its constituents boosts the public's
confidence in the legitimacy of the courts. ? İb]y not
providing LGBT individuals with the opportunity to disclose
this information İas the bill would provide], the law fails
to fully capture the diversity of current and future
applicants and appointees. The inclusion of these
questions is particularly timely as more and more 'out'
LGBT judges are filling seats on both state and federal
benches."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Capital Resource Institute
opposes this bill stating that "İn]ot only does this bill
pry into an individual's private life by asking him or her
whether they are heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual but
the government has no business collecting data pertaining
to a person's attraction to the same sex. Furthermore, a
judicial appointment is a serious matter and should
therefore not be used as a means to fill a quota. Judges
are and ought to continue to be considered for appointment
when they have shown they are capable of impartial rulings,
have a long history that qualifies them to be appointed,
and will fairly look and listen to the arguments presented
before them while at a hearing."
RJG:nl 5/27/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
SB 182
Page
6
CONTINUED