10.4: Descriptive Representation

The Growing Diversity of the Courts

When studying the legislative and executive branches, political scientists often study issues regarding descriptive representation—to consider how these branches work toward greater racial, ethnic, and gender diversity. This issue is also important for the California judiciary. Not so long ago, most lawyers and judges were white men. Law schools have also undergone an astounding transformation in the last two generations, reflecting the California population much better. Naturally, the demographics of the Court would lag behind the younger population of law students. Tables 10.4.1, 10.4.2, and 10.4.3 are demographic snapshots of the California court system regarding race, ethnicity, and gender ("Demographic Data").

Table \(\PageIndex{1}\): Gender (%) and California Judges (2022)

Court	Female	Male
Supreme Court	57.1	42.9
Courts of Appeal	42	58
Trial Courts	39.9	60.3

Table \(\PageIndex{2}\):Racial and Ethnic Characteristics (%) of Judges (2022)

Court	Am. Indian	Asian	Black	Hispanic	Pacific Islander	White	Other	More than one	Information not provided
Supreme Court	0	14.3	28.6	14.3	0	28.6	0	14.3	0
Courts of Appeals	0	5.7	9.1	9.1	0	70.5	2.3	3.4	0
Trial Court	.4	9.4	8.5	12.6	.4	61.1	1.0	4.5	2.0
Total	.4	9.3	8.6	12.5	.4	61.4	1.1	4.5	1.9

Compare this summary data with US census data (Quick facts) regarding the total population of California.

Table \(\PageIndex{3}\): Comparing the Demographics of the California Population and California Judges (2022)

Group	Percentage of the total population	Percentage of all Judges
Men	50	60.1
Women	50	39.9
Am. Indian	1.7	.4
Asian	15.9	8.7
Black	6.5	9.3
Hispanic	40.2	11.7
Pacific Islander	.5	.4
White only	35.2	61.4
Some other race	n.a.	1.1
More than one race	4.2	4.5

White men are overrepresented, and Hispanic, Asian, and Native American people are underrepresented. African American judges are roughly proportional to the population.

There are four reasons why descriptive representation is an important goal for the judiciary. First, the growth in diversity shows that there are greater opportunities for lawyers from many backgrounds. This is a sign of equal opportunity. Second, the legitimacy of the courts is enhanced when they have greater diversity. Because most judges begin their tenure as appointees by the governor to fill positions made vacant due to midterm retirements, a more diverse judiciary reflects the commitment of governors to select judges from many California backgrounds. Third, the greater diversity of judges helps the Courts better understand citizens' circumstances and needs when interacting with the judicial system. This is even more important as courts confront new legal issues. For example, the overturning of Roe v. Wade requires that state courts will now have much more of a role in regulating reproductive rights. Voting regulations and rights, electoral redistricting, and many other issues remain in flux. State courts will find themselves wading into controversial topics that address questions of race, gender, and class. Diverse courts will bring greater knowledge, understanding, and legitimacy to address these complex questions.