Race and
Ethnic Fairness
State:
Committee/Report Name: The Ohio
Commission on Racial Fairness was established in 1993 by the Ohio Supreme Court
in conjunction with the Ohio State Bar Association. They published their final report in 1999.
Number of
Committee Members: 33 Commission members
Number of
Subcommittees: No subcommittees
Chair/Co-Chairs:
Hon. Ronald B. Adrine, Hon. Thomas J. Moyer.
Methods
Used:
Public Hearings
Surveys
Other State Reports, Literature
Review
Topics
and Recommendations
Perception
Findings
1. Most of
those appearing before the Commission were convinced that our judicial system
is biased in favor of white, wealthy citizens and against those of color and
limited means. This perception goes beyond the court system itself.
2. Many of the complaints the Commission heard
were directed toward law enforcement, an integral part of the legal system. The
perception is that this is all part of the same system.
Attorneys, Judges, and Court Staff
Findings
1. White and
minority attorneys differ in the perceptions of the racial bias problems of
minority judges, attorneys, non-judicial court personnel and litigants. White
attorneys tended to perceive fewer problems of racial bias than their minority
colleagues saw.
2. In general,
minority attorneys were more likely than white attorneys to view the judicial
system as treating minorities unfairly—perhaps even applying a “guilty until
proven innocent” standard.
3. While most white attorneys expressed faith in
the courts and the distribution of justice, minority attorneys expressed deep
dissatisfaction.
Access
Findings
1. Most of the
attorneys, especially the minority attorneys, expressed awareness of and
dissatisfaction with court interpretation services.
2. When
the Commission began its study, approximately 546,000
3. Problems of available interpreter services
include inaccurate interpretations; failure to interpret the entire
message; interpreters adding, deleting or putting their own “spin” on testimony
or statements made by the parties, witness, court or counsel; and a lack of
understanding by interpreters of their professional responsibilities.
4. Problems with interpreter services arise
because of an underestimation and misunderstanding by the legal
community of the skills required to serve adequately as a court interpreter; an
absence of standards and criteria to qualify one to perform court and legal
interpreter services, an inability of the system to effectively and efficiently
locate qualified legal interpreters, and a shortage of qualified interpreters.
5.
6. The federal government was the
first to see interpreter services as a significant Constitutional problem and
was the first to attempt to remedy it. In 1988, Congress passed the Court
Interpreter Amendments Act that requires the use of criteria referenced
examinations to certify potential interpreters. By all reports, the federal
examinations are the most thorough currently being employed in the nation.
Since the development of the tests, fewer than 20 percent of those taking them
passed. This very low passage rate points out some of the problems faced in
developing an adequate pool of qualified interpreters to serve the entire state
court system in
7. A program that focuses on five to
10 languages would cover nearly all court proceedings requiring interpreter
services. The languages that such a program should include are those European
languages that gained worldwide currency during the colonial period as well as those
that reflect the recent influx of major Asian population groups into our
country and state.
8. In
9. Eventually,
Recommendations
1. The Supreme Court should conduct a survey of county and appellate court administrators throughout the state to determine the language needs of non-English speaking court participants.
2. The Supreme Court of
3. The Supreme Court of
4. The Supreme
Court of
Juries
Findings
1. Many people expressed concern in the various public hearing testimonies that minority defendants, particularly black defendants, are being tried before all-white juries.
2. In the public hearings, a
frequently articulated perception is that jury pools that depend solely upon
voter registration lists underrepresent poor people. Many poor people neither
vote, nor own vehicles, the two primary sources for jury pools.
3. It
was suggested that non-whites are less trustful of the judicial system and
therefore less likely to perform jury duty when summoned.
4. There is a
perception that minorities are routinely eliminated during voir
dire solely on the basis of their race, therefore they are less likely to
perform jury duty even when summoned.
Recommendations
1. The sources for jury selection should be further expanded. While currently the source for jurors is the voter registration list, we recommend that driver’s license records, state identification records and other appropriate sources also be used as lists of potential jurors.
2. Research should be conducted to
determine accurately the pattern of minority under-representation in juries in
Findings
1. Jurors were asked to respond to 10 questions regarding their perceptions of and participation in jury duty. Each question had nine ordinal response choices ranging from very good (value #1) to very poor (value #9). In general and overall, we found most of the jurors least satisfied with the “parking facilities” and the “process of selecting jurors” and most satisfied with “how the judge treated you” and the “judge’s treatment of “others.” When the responses were broken down by race, an interesting pattern emerges. While whites were the most satisfied with jury duty issues and their treatment by court personnel and judges, Hispanics were the least satisfied, and blacks tended to fall in the middle on many of the questions regarding treatment. In responding to the question regarding the manner in which the court processed jurors, the average ethnic distribution was: blacks 2.8, whites 2.4 and Hispanics 4.0. The mean (“average”) distribution by race for the question regarding orientation on arrival was: black 2.6, white 2.4 and Hispanic 2.5. The ethnic mean distribution for the various questions are as follows: “Process of selecting jurors to serve on panels:” blacks 3.3, whites 3.1 and Hispanic 6.5; “Treatment by staff while on jury assignment:” blacks 2.1, whites 1.7 and Hispanics 2.8; “Treatment by courtroom bailiff:” blacks 2.1, whites 1.8 and Hispanics 3.0; “Judges treatment of you:” blacks 2.1, whites 1.6 and Hispanics 3.0; “Judges treatment of others”: blacks 2.2, whites 1.8 and Hispanics 3.0.
Recommendations
1. The state law restriction of $40
maximum compensation a day should be periodically reviewed for fairness and the
amount increased where appropriate to meet jurors’ economic needs.
2. Research should be conducted
concerning the ways in which minority jurors are treated and their racial
perceptions during court proceedings and while deliberating with their peers
during a trial.
3. The Supreme Court of
Courtroom Experience
Findings
1. Judges were
taken to task for their rudeness and lack of sensitivity.
2. Most
respondents to the attorney survey claimed not to have head inappropriate
comments or jokes about their race in their presence by another attorney,
judge, or court personnel. However, many of the attorneys did say they
frequently heard inappropriate comments about another person’s race in their
presence. (See also Courtroom Environment: Court Staff, Finding #1; Courtroom
Environment: Lawyers/Others, Finding # 3)
3. Because American demographics have shifted
but have not changed, the majority of
Recommendations
1. The Supreme Court should revise the Code of Professional Responsibility similarly to the Code of Judicial Conduct, specifically Canon 3(B)(5) and (6). The responsibility of attorneys and judges should be to avoid all behavior that tends to denigrate public respect and confidence in the legal system, including avoiding discriminatory conduct on the basis of any person’s race, gender, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or economic status. (See also Courtroom Environment: Lawyers/Others, Recommendation #1)
Findings
1. Most
respondents to the attorney survey claimed not to have head inappropriate
comments or jokes about their race in their presence by another attorney,
judge, or court personnel. However, many of the attorneys did say they
frequently heard inappropriate comments about another person’s race in their
presence. (See also Courtroom Environment: Judges, Finding #2; Courtroom
Environment: Lawyers/Others, Finding # 3)
2. It would be useful to present and analyze data on distasteful racial language and grievance procedures with an institution-wide lens. This is done by looking at the total percentages of surveyed employees who answered never as opposed to very frequently, frequently, infrequently or very infrequently to the questions: “Inappropriate comments or jokes about my race have been made in my presence” (40.4 percent); and “Inappropriate comments or jokes about another person’s race have been made in my presence” (21.5 percent). Even though it is true that most employees marked infrequent responses (51.6 percent in the first instance and 61.1 percent in the second instance), the relatively low numbers of employees never subjected to negative racial language indicates serious race relations problems.
Findings
1. Concerning
civil and criminal cases, minority attorneys tended to be much more pessimistic
than white attorneys about the negative impact of being a minority defendant.
2. When asked
about courtroom environment factors, the vast majority of minority and white
attorneys agreed. Minority attorneys, litigants, expert witnesses and lay
witnesses are not inappropriately addressed and are not interrupted more than
their white counterparts.
3. Most respondents to the attorney survey
claimed not to have head inappropriate comments or jokes about their race in
their presence by another attorney, judge, or court personnel. However, many of
the attorneys did say they frequently heard inappropriate comments about
another person’s race in their presence. (See also Courtroom Environment:
Judges, Finding #2; Courtroom Environment: Court Staff, Finding #1)
Recommendations
1. The Supreme Court should revise the Code of
Professional Responsibility similarly to the Code of Judicial Conduct,
specifically Canon 3(B)(5) and (6). The responsibility
of attorneys and judges should be to avoid all behavior that tends to denigrate
public respect and confidence in the legal system, including avoiding
discriminatory conduct on the basis of any person’s race, gender, religion,
national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or economic status. (See
also Courtroom Environment: Judges, Recommendation #1)
Quality of
Legal Representation
Findings
1. Some
witnesses directed their ire toward the white court-appointed attorneys or
public defenders. Many of the witnesses felt that these lawyers paid little or
no attention to their cases and that they were forced to plead guilty or no
contest to charges when they had not committed a crime.
2. An
important variable in sentencing is the effectiveness of defense counsel.
Because the non-white groups studied for this report are disproportionately
represented in the ranks of the indigent defendant, determining the quality of
the services that they receive from their court-appointed counsel has both
racial and economic implications for the criminal justice system.
3. Those who represent themselves are at a great disadvantage when confronted with the resources that the criminal justice system can marshal. However, the disadvantage is only slightly diminished if the lawyers who are charged with the responsibility of protecting the rights of this populations harbor inappropriate racial attitudes regarding clients that they receive by the luck of the draw. It is therefore important that sound methods for evaluating the performance of this important part of the system, both prior to and at the time of sentencing, on the critical issue of race be in place.
4. In some
Legal Profession
Recruitment/Acceptance
to
Findings
1. It appears that all of the responding law schools are making a concerted effort to recruit minority students. All send mailings to promising minority candidates, invite them to campus, and have outreach programs to attract minority students. All participate in law school fairs and most have summer enrichment programs for minority students. Most have scholarships and two have fellowships for minority students.
2. In spite of the fact that there
has been an overall increase in the minority law student population in many
Ohio law schools, there is a need for Ohio law schools to recruit, retain and
graduate more law students of color in order to admit more licensed attorneys
of color into the profession.
3. Responses to the law school
questionnaires by the eight law schools indicated most of the 1994-95 and
1998-99 student admission committees of these schools were predominately white
in terms of administrators, faculty and law students. Only two law school
committees had two minority faculty members; one law school committee had one
minority faculty member, and the rest had none. In part, the lack of minority
faculty on admission committees is a function of the low percentage of minority
professors in
4. Regarding faculty recruitment,
most of the deans reported their schools are using more than one strategy to
identify and interview potential faculty of color. Most law schools send
mailings to promising faculty candidates and invite candidates to campus and
offer guided tours. Nevertheless, it is evident that in keeping with national
trends, most
5. As the Commission members met with
more and more students, it became clear that a prevalent student concern at all
6. The law schools’ responses to the
retention and curriculum questions were among the most interesting. Most of the
deans reported their schools had general formal orientation programs for all
students rather than orientation programs that targeted minority students. What
is unknown is to what extent are culturally pluralistic norms, values,
traditions, and resources discussed during the general orientation programs?
Some
7. Five deans indicated their schools
had diversity requirements that amounted to students being required to take
courses on gender and/or racial law. The remaining three law schools left
course diversification up to the discretion of the faculty.
8. Most
9. The military and a number of
universities and corporations have found that when cultural diversity
sensitivity issues are linked to managerial promotion and merit evaluation, it
makes such demographic changes part of the normative structure of an
institution.
10. Such diversity sensitivity training
is certainly not a panacea for the elements of racism that exist in law schools
and society as a whole. Nevertheless, such training would assist with
day-to-day interactions among majority and minority students, faculty and
administrators. Perhaps as a result of such training, white faculty might be
encouraged to seek out, assist, and advise students of color, so that this does
not become the “unofficial duty and responsibility” of faculty of color.
11. All of the deans reported their
law schools have extracurricular activities which address racial issues, such
as the Black Law Student Association (BLSA) and the Hispanic Law Student
Association (HLSA).
12. Not one law school review or
journal has more than a few minority student members.
Of the law schools responding to the questionnaire, one school had 16 percent
minority representation on the law review; the number drops to nine percent at
the next school before bottoming out at five percent.
13. Only three schools reported having
administrators with primary responsibility for specific groups such as racial
minorities, women and the physically handicapped. The status and effectiveness
of these administrators were not revealed. If given empowered, proactive
charges, such diversity policymaking positions may prove to be very effective.
Law schools should establish a mechanism to ensure a systemic approach toward
minority issues in law schools. In other words, all policies, activities,
staffing and initiatives should be viewed with an eye toward minority input and
concern for the impact they might have on minorities.
14. The final hurdle in law school
education is passing the bar exam. Data on bar results is important not only
for the law schools from which students graduate, but for the legal profession
as a whole. Race-based discrepancies should be noted in totality and by law
school, and examined by the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Recommendations
1. Law schools should give priority to
efforts to recruit and retain minority students. The Commission strongly
supports and encourages affirmative action and diversity programs that attract
and retain minority students and staff. Some suggested strategies to accomplish
this include the following:
a. Law schools should use candidate referral
service lists to contact minority students who take the LSAT and provide them
information specific to the minority experiences at the law school.
b. Law schools should attend large law school
recruitment forums and pre-law fairs and make certain the team representing the
law school includes students of color.
c. Law schools should visit historically black
colleges and other colleges with a high-minority representation.
d. Law schools should encourage minority
students to enroll in law school by showing interest in their matriculation
through telephone calls and mailings from the law school dean, faculty and
administration. Sending letters and calling after a student’s application has
been accepted shows additional support and encouragement. Law schools should consider
applying for Law School Admission Council (LSAC) funding for a February
minority recruitment program.
e. The Supreme Court’s support of the report and funding of programs similar to the Indiana CLEO program should be adopted by the Ohio General Assembly.
f. Law schools should maintain contacts with
college advisory offices and send updated information regarding the school
requirements and admissions process to, at minimum, local junior high and high
schools. Special presentations could be made to encourage minority student
interest through programs such as Big Brothers/Big Sisters, summer programs for
high school students and “magnet high school” relationships in the local area.
g. Law schools should design and publish public
relations materials about their law schools and law school life that
demonstrate the cultural pluralism commitments of the school.
2. The Admissions Committee should
include minority student representation.
3. Law schools should recruit and maintain minorities to serve as law school faculty and staff and adopt policies aimed at advancement toward tenure and retention of minority faculty members. The Commission suggests the following strategies to address this task:
a. Law schools should involve professors and
students of color in the recruitment process for dean, faculty and
administrator positions.
b. Law schools should actively seek out and
identify minority individuals that may be “faculty material,” whether it be at conferences, minority organizations, minority alumni,
other minority professionals or through the practicing bar. The Commission
highly encourages schools to go outside of the “traditional structure” in order
to increase the pool of candidates.
4. Law schools should evaluate the graduation rates among students of color and include an objective evaluation of the scope and effectiveness of each school’s academic support programs.
5. Law
schools should review their academic program to assess ways in which diversity
values are manifest throughout the institution. This may be partially achieved
by providing diversity sensitivity training for the dean, faculty,
administration and students. Students should be sensitive to the impact of bias
in many substantive and procedural contexts. Such training might assist
professors with their delivery and style during class communications.
Additionally, law schools are encouraged to find ways professors can integrate
the effects of race and ethnicity upon legal decision making and the effects of
legal decisions upon racial and ethnic minorities including the treatment of
fellow professionals and treatment of court users. The law schools should set
up their own method of accomplishing this.
6. Law schools should continue to
review their courses, extracurricular programming, introduction to law
programs, student orientation and student life to consider the extent to which
diversity values are embedded in their academic and nonacademic programming. In
addition, textbooks, course materials and classroom presentations should be
reviewed and altered where necessary, to eliminate overt and subtle race and
ethnic bias whenever discrimination is not the subject of the course or case.
7. Law schools should continue to
review co-curricular programs to ensure minority students are actively sought out
for inclusion. Faculty and law review members should make certain the writing
competitions and application processes are fair and equal to all students. Some
suggested strategies to accomplish this include faculty members acting as
sponsors for law reviews, journals and moot court should communicate early in
the minority students’ law school careers regarding the process by which
students are admitted onto these scholarly publications, become editors or
participate on the moot court team(s). Law review or journal members and
editors and moot court team members should make presentations at minority
organizational meetings (e.g., HLSA, BLSA). Minority students should be advised
as to how to increase their chances of getting on these publications or teams.
8. The Commission recommends all Ohio
law schools should continue to annually review their polices and internal
procedures for addressing violations of human rights or discrimination and make
modification as necessary to foster confidence and a commitment to racial
fairness among faculty, staff and students. If such a policy and procedure does
not exist, one should be adopted within one year and reviewed annually.
9. The Commission recommends the
Supreme Court of Ohio collect racial and ethnic information on bar examination
candidates and monitor the results for race-based discrepancies.
10. The Commission recommends that
each law school should continue to monitor and evaluate student and faculty
recruitment and retention. Law schools should report relevant data as may be
prescribed by the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Findings
1. Increasing
minority representation on the bar is a goal for which the entire legal system
must continue to strive.
2. White and
minority attorneys vary greatly in their perceptions of their career
advancement chances. White attorneys are much more satisfied with career
advancement possibilities than are minority attorneys.
3. White
attorneys are more likely than minority attorneys to assume there are at least
as many employment and mentoring opportunities for minority attorneys as there
are for white attorneys.
4. Both white
and minority attorneys expressed the opinion that minority attorneys are given
hiring preferences over “more qualified” white attorneys.
5. With regard to placement issues, in 1994-95
three law schools had “special programs that specifically assist minority
students seeking summer employment or employment following graduation.” In
1998-99, six schools offered such assistance. All eight law schools offer
“discussions or presentations” by legal professionals in various fields, while
five offer such services targeting minority students. All eight responding law
schools provide “written information about specific professional options,”
while five target minority students for information distribution.
Recommendations
1. Bar associations and the Court should develop more effective working relationships with minority attorneys, such as: (1) joint minority and bar association career related activities; (2) joint sponsorship of a centralized placement service targeting the recruitment of minority attorneys in private industry, government, firms, non-profit organizations and law schools; and (3) the availability of recruitment and job placement information on the OSBA Web site and in other professional media and publication networks. Various bar associations, local and state clerkship and mentoring programs should continue.
2. The Supreme Court should, by rule, require
that all judges and lawyers use their best efforts to guarantee a bias-free
workplace. This could be accomplished in part by the following: (See also Court
as Employer/Appointer: Hiring/Promotion Recommendation #4)
a. The Code of Professional Responsibility
should be amended to encourage lawyers to recruit hire, promote and retain
minorities.
b. Local bar associations may establish
committees to monitor local courtrooms and court offices and to file their
reports of observations with the Supreme Court.
3. Placement directors should be encouraged to work with professional associations, bar organizations, minority alumni and the courts to facilitate the entry of minority students into summer clerkships and other opportunities which lead to professional development.
Education
Recommendations
1. The
implementation task force should develop an anti-racism workshop curriculum
that would be implemented by the
2. All groups and organizations involved in the criminal justice system - e.g., police, prosecutors, defense counsel, pre-trial release personnel, probation personnel, judges – should engage in a continuing process of study and discussion with the objective of identifying and eradicating race based attitudes and practices. (See also Education: Court Staff, Recommendation #3; Education: Lawyers, Recommendation #3)
Findings
1. Most of the professional employees in the top
three tiers surveyed felt that there already exists a sufficient level of diversity
training. In contrast, most of the other employees indicated they felt there
was too little or insufficient training. The highest number
of employees indicating a need for more diversity training were the
frontline professionals of the courts— the protective services personnel. In
addition, in each occupational category, more minorities than whites felt more
diversity training was needed.
Recommendations
1. The implementation task force should develop
an anti-racism workshop curriculum that would be implemented by the
2. The
Supreme Court should instruct the
3. All groups
and organizations involved in the criminal justice system - e.g., police,
prosecutors, defense counsel, pre-trial release personnel, probation personnel,
judges – should engage in a continuing process of
study and discussion with the objective of identifying and eradicating race
based attitudes and practices. (See also Education: Judges, Recommendation #2;
Education: Lawyers, Recommendation #3)
Recommendations
1. The implementation task force should develop
an anti-racism workshop curriculum that would be implemented by the
2. The Supreme Court of
3. All groups and organizations involved in the
criminal justice system - e.g., police, prosecutors, defense counsel, pre-trial
release personnel, probation personnel, judges –
should engage in a continuing process of study and discussion with the
objective of identifying and eradicating race based attitudes and practices.
(See also Education: Judges, Recommendation #2; Education: Court Staff,
Recommendation #3)
4. All attorneys who wish to do criminal defense work should receive formal training in the basics of criminal defense, and only be permitted to do so upon obtaining certification as to proficiency.
Recommendations
1. The Supreme
Court of
Criminal Justice
Findings
1. Witnesses
in nearly all of the sites told of being stopped by the police for no apparent
legal reason, only because of their color.
2. Many witnesses alleged that the percentage of
black males under 25 arrested is inappropriately
disproportionate to their percentage of the population.
Recommendations
1. Law enforcement agencies should maintain statistical data as to race in connection with all arrests.
Recommendations
1. Statistical data as to race be collected as to pretrial bond decisions.
Findings
1. The disparity
in the sentences handed down was a consistent criticism directed toward judges.
2. As of
3. One
hundred seventy-five (175) people were the victims of those currently residing
on
4. With
legislative enactments that curtail judges’ discretion in sentencing, such as
mandatory sentences and sentencing guidelines, a prosecutor’s role becomes more
powerful. Therefore, the racial attitudes of some prosecutors may play an
extremely important role.
5. An institutional
commitment to a process of regular and ongoing data collection, analysis, and
reporting, as well as both agency and individual accountability will eliminate
the excuse of “lack of information” as a convenient shield for those who would
hide their inability or unwillingness to assure equal treatment to all those
involved in our state’s criminal justice system and serve as a weapon for equal
justice for all, rather than just another dilatory review.
Recommendations
1. Statistical data as to race should be maintained in connection with sentences, including community based sentences, in all criminal cases, including misdemeanor, juvenile and traffic cases.
Findings
1. From
1988 to 1994, the national figures of the black rate of incarceration in state
prisons increased from 6.88 times that of whites to 7.66. In
2. What we can say without fear of
contradiction is that the number of minority citizens sentenced to prison is
grossly disproportionate to any reasonable correlation with their numbers in
the general, lower social-economic, or even, criminal populations.
Court as
employer/appointer
Findings
1. A number of
witnesses remarked that upon coming to court, minority citizens are met by a
sea of white faces,-- the arresting officer, the court
clerk, the defense attorney, the prosecutor, and finally the judge. The
Commission heard over and over again that no people of color were observed.
2. The
court employee survey reveals that whites overwhelmingly dominate the three top
levels of court employment including judgeships, while most minorities are in
protective services or in administrative support positions.
3. Even
though most court employees (56 percent) are very satisfied or somewhat
satisfied with their work environments, a large number (44 percent) are either
somewhat or very dissatisfied. Broken down ethnically, 56 percent of black
employees and 64 percent of white employees are very satisfied or somewhat
satisfied, and 44 percent of black employees and 36 percent of white employees
are somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.
4. Considering
that most surveyed court employees registered satisfaction, the largest group
to express discontent with career advancement were those in protective services
followed by those in administrative support staff positions.
5. In
addition to the differences in job satisfaction between whites and minorities,
whites are generally unaware of the perceptions of their colleagues of color
regarding career advancement opportunities for minorities. The discrepancy in
perception is greatest between blacks and whites. In responding to the
question, “Advancement opportunities available to minorities are greater, the
same as, or less than those available to whites,” the black responses (67)
were: greater-2; the same-7; and less than-58, and the white responses (225)
were: greater-65; the same-122; and less than-8.
6. With respect to the issue of job entry, most
surveyed court employees learned about the job they occupy through friends and
colleagues, school and family rather than through the more impersonal means of
media postings or job placement services. Survey data analysis also provided a
fascinating insight into the different ways whites and minorities learn about
available employment in the court system. Like most of their white co-workers
and colleagues, most minorities learned about employment opportunities through
friends and colleagues. However, not as many attributed their employment to
family and school ties, and more were dependent on media postings. This finding
is in keeping with the extensive literature documenting the fact that, in high
status employment and employment in exclusive institutional sectors such as
courts, minorities do not have the personal contacts, especially the close
friendship connections, that whites have and use in
securing employment.
Recommendations
1. The court system (beginning with the Supreme Court and with its requirements, where appropriate, of lower courts) should recruit, hire and retain increased numbers of minorities in all positions in the court system: appointive, administrative, managerial and professional personnel, especially in middle- and senior management and policy-making positions. This employment process should include these characteristics:
a. The court system should establish policies designed for equal opportunity, recruitment and promotion of minorities. These policies should be reviewed regularly to determine if there are any impediments to hiring and promoting minorities at all levels of employment in the court system.
b. The court system at every level should
advertise all employment and court volunteer vacancies widely. To penetrate the
informal and formal networks and institutions of minorities, emphasis should be
placed on advertising in minority media and communities such as community
media; churches, ethnic, civic and professional associations; and minority
student organizations on university and college campuses.
c. The court system should develop a system for
adopting performance standards for all of its employees and for the employees
of lower courts on the handling of racially, culturally and ethnically
sensitive issues. Such performance standards should be included in job
descriptions, orientations and performance evaluations.
d. The Supreme Court of
e. The court system should increase the number
of bilingual and multilingual court employees and encourage these employees to
be trained in court interpretation.
f. The court system should develop mechanisms
to monitor employment opportunities for minorities in the court system.
g. The court system should provide all employees
with formal general management and leadership training to increase the
likelihood of their success
2. The
diversity goal-setting plans of managers, and the extent to which their goals
are met, should be strongly evaluated in their merit and promotion reviews. All
state courts should give supervisors and other managers
financial and symbolic incentives (e.g. letters of commendation, award, etc.)
for effectively mentoring, developing and managing an ethnically and racially
diverse work environment.
3. The
Supreme Court should, by rule, require that each court within the state
complete a written report each year, on a form prescribed by rule, listing
statistics on the race and gender of all employees of the court system. The
reports should then be compiled, reported and published annually by the Supreme
Court.
4. The Supreme Court should, by rule, require
that all judges and lawyers use their best efforts to guarantee a bias-free
workplace. This could be accomplished in part by the following: (See also Legal
Profession: Hiring/Promotion, Recommendation #2)
a. The Code of Judicial Conduct should be
amended to create sanctions for tolerating a racially hostile work environment.
b. The statistics of the racial composition of
each court’s employees shall be compiled and published as set forth above.
c. Local bar associations may establish
committees to monitor local courtrooms and court offices and to file their
reports of observations with the Supreme Court.
5. Each appellate court district should establish a task force on the eradication of racial bias in court employment composed of: judges, att