1.1% lesbian, 1% gay, 40% won’t say

California releases stats on judges’ sexual orientation, among other data

News release from Administrative Office of the Courts
March 1, 2012

San Francisco — The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has released demographic data on the ethnicity, race, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation of California state judges and justices. The information is available on the California Courts website.

The information is provided in compliance with Government Code section 12011.5(n), which requires the AOC to “collect and release” aggregate demographic data on the ethnicity, race, gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation of California state judges and justices, by specific jurisdiction, on or before March 1 of each year.

This is the sixth year that the council has released this information. Added to this year’s report for the first time are demographic data on gender identity and sexual orientation as required by Senate Bill 182 (Corbett), which was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2011. The bill was sponsored by Equality California.

As in previous years, the law provides that the AOC must collect and release the information provided by judges and justices. It is entirely voluntary for justices and judges to provide it.

The data are displayed in charts reflecting justices and judges on the bench as of December 31, 2011.

The data show:

  1. The overall gender, race, ethnicity, gender identity, and sexual orientation of justices and judges in the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, and trial courts;
  2. the gender of justices and judges by jurisdiction — for the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal by district, and trial courts by county;
  3. The race and ethnicity of justices and judges by jurisdiction;
  4. The specific race and ethnicity reported by those justices and judges who indicated that they are of more than one race or ethnicity;
  5. The gender identity and sexual orientation of justices and judges by jurisdiction; and
  6. A comparison of the current overall data on gender and race/ethnicity with the data from the reports of the last five years.

The data show an increase in the percentage of female appellate court justices and trial court judges in 2011. Women now represent 31.1 percent of the judiciary, compared to 27.1 percent in 2006, continuing a steady upward trend over the past six years.

The data also show changes over the past six years in the percentage of justices and judges reported in the following race and ethnicity categories:

American Indian or Alaska Native (0.4 percent in 2011 compared to 0.1 percent in 2006);
Asian (5.6 percent in 2011 compared to 4.4 percent in 2006);
Black or African American (5.7 percent in 2011 compared to 4.4 percent in 2006);
Hispanic or Latino (8.2 percent in 2011 compared to 6.3 percent in 2006);
Pacific Islander (0.2 percent in 2011 compared to 0.1 percent in 2006);
White (72.3 percent in 2011 compared to 70.1 percent in 2006);
Some Other Race (1.1 percent in 2011 compared to 0.2 percent in 2006);
More Than One Race (3.5 percent in 2011 compared to 4.4 percent in 2006); and
Information Not Provided (2.9 percent in 2011compared to 9.9 percent in 2006).

These changes reflect judicial retirements and other departures from the bench, new judicial appointments, and an increase in the number of trial court judges who have provided race/ethnicity information.

The additional data in this year’s report regarding gender identity and sexual orientation include the following percentages:

Heterosexual, 57.7 percent;
Lesbian, 1.1 percent;
Gay, 1.0 percent;
Bisexual, 0 percent;
Transgender, 0.06 percent; and
Information not provided, 40 percent.

To read the full report, Click Here.

 

READER COMMENTS

Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 12:33 AM By Pat
How does this information provided make someone a good and fair constitutional judge? How does the info show good morals, decent standards, and legal ability? I would rather know if someone is a practicing Catholic or practicing Evangelical.


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 6:42 AM By Ray Marshall
How many judges responded to the survey?


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 9:09 AM By Laurette Elsberry
If there are any bisexual Pacific Islander or Eskimo judge-wannabe out there, that person stands the best chance of getting the next judgeship in California. Crazy? No, perverse, but look who is in charge of this State.


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 9:37 AM By Sandra
How does this information show good morals, ethics and seeker of the Truth? How many are living in sin? How many are committing adultry? How many have left there wives and kids for a fling? How can we tell which of these judges are “constitutional judges”?


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 9:50 AM By Ski Ven
Even those of us who are intellectually disadvantaged can see this one coming: a religious test for being allowed to serve as a judge.


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 9:51 AM By Abeca Christian
California you have an obsession with homosexuality!


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 11:09 AM By k
Ray Marshall, 1677


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 11:30 AM By bud
How soon will “Equality California” the sponsor of the original bill/law demand yes demand that it is a Must to report your sexual identity. Any judge that even responds period to such a census should adamantly refuse. Again the Hollywood backed trash are even after our legal system.


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 11:34 AM By MacDonald
How many of these judges think such statistics are dumb?


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 2:12 PM By Brian in Canada
Sounds like NAZI Germany in the 1930s? Hilter and is ilk requiring all Jews to wear a Star of David on their chest! “Hollywood Trash” is an appropriate name for those bankrolling the election of Truly Unacceptable Politicians. It is time for ALL GOOD PEOPLE TO CAST THEIR VOTE FOR GOOD PEOPLE IN ELECTIONS. God Bless America.


Posted Friday, March 02, 2012 3:52 PM By Delilah
Homosexuals make up about 2-3% of the public. I have seen estimates of up to 5%. This seems to hold true in this survey. What else is new? Pax


Posted Saturday, March 03, 2012 12:45 PM By Felice
race: human; sex: yes we need to spend money on people not on classifying and putting them in categories, even if it is to “help” because you end up hurting another group, resulting from these classifications.


Posted Tuesday, March 06, 2012 12:36 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
It actually use to be that a Judge or for that matter any elected Officer had to display “High Morals”! Now not even many of the so called Knights of Columbus display such! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher


Posted Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:30 PM By Abeca Christian
2% confused!

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.