Does your employer ask you to reveal your sexual orientation?

California Asks Judges: Gay or Straight?

The Weekly StandardIn order to make sure gays and lesbians are adequately represented on the judicial bench, the state of California is requiring all judges and justices to reveal their sexual orientation. The announcement was made in an internal memo sent to all California judges and justices.

“[The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)] is contacting all judges and justices to gather data on race/ethnicity, gender identification, and sexual orientation,” reads an email sent by Romunda Price of the AOC. A copy of Price’s memo was obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD. 

Providing complete and accurate aggregate demographic data is crucial to garnering continuing legislative support for securing critically needed judgeships,” Price writes.  The process of self-revealing one’s sexual orientation is an element of a now yearly process. “To ensure that the AOC reports accurate data and to avoid the need to ask all judges to provide this information on an annual basis, the questionnaire asks that names be provided. The AOC, however, will release only aggregate statistical information, by jurisdiction, as required by the Government Code and will not identify any specific justice or judge.” 

Philip R. Carrizosa of the executive office of communications at the Judicial Council of California, the Administrative Office of the Courts, confirmed the authenticity of Price’s email regarding gender identification and sexual orientation to THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

“Yes, the e-mail is authentic and accurate,” Carrizosa confirmed in an email. “The original bill, which simply provided for 50 new judgeships, was amended in the Assembly in August 2006, to address concerns that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was not appointing enough women and minorities to the bench. In 2011, Senator Ellen Corbett expanded the reporting requirement to include gender identification and sexual orientation.”

California state senator Corbett, the Democratic majority leader from the San Francisco suburb San Leandro, could not immediately be reached for comment.

Price’s email also reveals that the AOC is asking for this personal information because of the new law. “For the past five years, the AOC has been required to collect and release aggregate demographic data relative to the ethnicity, race, and gender of justices and judges, by specific jurisdiction, on or before March 1 of each year. This requirement is associated with efforts to obtain new judgeships.

But as a result of Corbett’s 2011 California bill, the office has “expanded the collection and release of aggregate demographic data to include gender identification and sexual orientation.” Therefore, Price explains, judges and justices must reveal their “sexual orientation,” in addition “to their race/ethnicity [and] gender identification.” Price parenthetically adds, “The AOC has gender data for all judges and justices.”

I’m confused….why is it necessary to reveal your sexual orientation in order to “obtain new judgeships”?  Can you imagine a private sector firm asking you to reveal your sexual orientation in order to hire more employees?

 If I’m ever in a court, I would only hope that the judge would follow the law of the land, providing a forum that is fair and just.

What doesn’t confuse me as to why the state of California wants to make sure that gay people are represented on the judicial bench.  Ever heard of a little thing called Prop 8?

DCG

8 responses to “Does your employer ask you to reveal your sexual orientation?

  1. Sexual orientation ? Uh….mostly horizontal. :)
    Never as an engineer a question to which you
    don’t know the answer….which is why we can’t be judges.

  2. Well, what about pedophiles?? Are there a proportionate percentage of pedophiles on the bench representing the pedophiles in community?? What about sado-masochists?? Swingers?? Persons who engage in bestiality?? Are perverts being represented on the Judicial benches in proportion to perversion in society?? How about adulterers?? Strippers?? Prostitutes?? I mean, is every broad range of deviant behavior and sexual licentiousness being represented “equally”??

  3. Hey, what about trannies? Shouldn’t California courts also have a quota, oops, affirmative action for transsexual judges? [snark]

  4. What’s next, their favorite juice, their shoe size and their sperm count?

  5. The problem with this article, as well as the original story in The Weekly Standard, is that judges are NOT required to answer this question. While the Administrative Office of the Courts is statutorily required to ask the question, judges are free to ignore it, just as they may refuse to answer questions about their ethnicity. If the writer had checked the facts with me as spokesperson for the AOC, he would have learned the truth.

    • Since you are quoted in the article and confirmed the email, I would have expected you to reveal that information to The Weekly Standard and insist they note that fact as well. Thank you for your clarification.

      Since I am a full-time worker with a life, and an unpaid blogger on the side, I regularly post articles and provide links to the original source. I try to make sure stories are on the up and up, yet do not have time to call every single participant in every single article. When corrections are required, they shall be noted.

    • DCG is an unpaid blogger who re-published and quoted from the original source, The Weekly Standard. Go take it up with The Weekly Standard. Stop harassing us.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s