BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 126
                                                                  Page  1

          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
          AB 126 (Davis)
          As Amended August 25, 2011
          Majority vote 
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |48-27|(May 23, 2011)  |SENATE: |24-12|(August 30,    |
          |           |     |                |        |     |2011)          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
            
           Original Committee Reference:    JUD.  


           SUMMARY  :  Requires each member of the State Bar's Commission on 
          Judicial Nominees Evaluation to complete fairness and anti-bias 
          training and clarifies existing requirements for collection of 
          demographic data of judicial applicants.  Specifically,  this 
          bill  :

          1)Requires that each new member of the designated agency of the 
            California State Bar (State Bar) responsible for evaluation of 
            judicial candidates complete a minimum of 60 minutes of 
            mandatory training in the areas of fairness and bias in the 
            judicial appointments process.  If the member serves more than 
            one term, the member shall complete an additional 60 minutes 
            of that training during the member's service.

          2)Clarifies existing requirements imposed on the Governor, the 
            State Bar, and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) 
            for collecting annual demographic data, including a 
            requirement that, with respect to the collection and release 
            of demographic data, the State Bar and the AOC use the ethnic 
            and racial categories designated and used by the United States 
            Census Bureau for the 2010 Census, and each year thereafter 
            for reporting purposes.

          3)Encourages members of judicial selection advisory committees 
            to recommend candidates from diverse backgrounds and cultures 
            reflecting the California's demographics.

           The Senate amendments  significantly narrow the bill by deleting 
          the requirement that the Governor release the names of 
          participants involved in the judicial selection process.  
          Additionally, the amendments change the minimal time members are 
          required to complete for mandatory training and add language to 








                                                                  AB 126
                                                                  Page  2

          resolve chaptering issues with SB 182 (Corbett). 
           
          EXISTING LAW  requires that on or before March 1 of each year, 
          all of the following shall occur:  1) the Governor shall 
          disclose aggregate statewide demographic data provided by all 
          judicial applicants relative to ethnicity and gender; 2) the 
          designated agency of the State Bar responsible for evaluating 
          judicial candidates shall collect and release statewide 
          demographic data provided by judicial applicants reviewed and a 
          statewide summary of the recommendations of the designated 
          agency by ethnicity and gender; and, 3) the AOC shall collect 
          and release the demographic data provided by justices and judges 
          relative to ethnicity and gender by specific jurisdiction.     

           AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY  , this bill was substantially similar 
          than the version approved by the Senate.
           
          FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Senate Appropriations 
          Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
           
          COMMENTS  :  In recent years there has been increased attention by 
          the Legislature on the continuing need to develop new efforts to 
          address the continuing lack of sufficient diversity in the 
          state's judiciary.  For example, when considering the merits of 
          prior legislation seeking to authorize 50 new judgeships, former 
          Speaker Fabian N��ez insisted that before more judgeships would 
          be authorized, new mechanisms would need to be adopted to help 
          address the lack of ethnic and gender diversity within the 
          judicial branch.  As part of these efforts, unprecedented new 
          diversity reporting requirements were imposed to begin the 
          challenging process of addressing this problem.  The State Bar, 
          the Governor's office, and the Judicial Council were all 
          required to prepare and issue reports on the diversity of the 
          judicial applicant pool and of the existing judiciary.  Reports 
          by these three entities over the past several years demonstrate 
          some progress has been made on the diversity front.  
          Unfortunately, with the long history of inadequately diverse 
          appointments, it has meant that even after a bit more diverse 
          appointments in recent years, much more work remains to be done. 

           

          Analysis Prepared by  :  Drew Liebert / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 










                                                                  AB 126
                                                                  Page  3

                                                                 FN: 
          0002422