It’s not clear what kind of metric you would want to use when addressing the question of diversity on the state bench. Should the number of minority judges be compared to the percentages of each minority in the state? Or cumulatively? Or should we compare the number of judges to the number of minority attorneys?  Of course the percentage of minority attorneys is substantially less than the percentage of minorities in the state generally.  And furthermore, should we be stressing diversity of fitness for the job?

Arnold’s done better than his GOP predecessors, but not quite as well as Davis:

About 22 percent of Schwarzenegger’s judicial appointees to date identify themselves as Asian-American, Latino or African-American, up from a cumulative total of about 16 percent just 18 months ago. The percentages exceed the state’s share of minority attorneys, yet fall short of reflecting the diversity of California’s general population, a goal advocates are striving for.

Schwarzenegger’s share of minority judicial appointments since taking office in late 2003 has surpassed that of Govs. Pete Wilson and George Deukmejian, who served a full eight years each. By contrast, minority judicial appointments by Gray Davis, the most recent Democratic governor, were around 29 percent.(SJ Merc 3/13/08)

Jeff Adachi, SF Public Defender, later points out that there’s still a ways to go to get a truly representative court. However, we now keep good statistics on these things, and that has done a world of good. Other things pointed out in the article include an increased effort at outreach to minority bar associations, and the hiring of Sharon Majors-Lewis as the judicial appointments secretary.

Diversity is a continuing challenge, and really starts at an even lower level by improving the schools in minority neighborhoods. I wonder how Arnold’s budget cuts will help with long-range goals of diversity? Hmmm…