https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/ en https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-guerrero-announces-2026-civic-learning-award-honorees Chief Justice Guerrero Announces 2026 Civic Learning Award HonoreesMartin.Novitski Fri, 05/01/2026 - 12:05 News Release SACRAMENTO—Today, Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero announced the recipients of the 2026 Civic Learning Awards, the state’s highest honor recognizing K–12 schools for outstanding achievement in civic education. “These schools show what’s possible when school administrators, teachers, and students work together to make civic engagement a core part of the educational experience,” said Chief Justice Guerrero. One elementary school, one middle school, and one high school received the Civic Learning Award of Excellence, highlighting their exceptional programs that empower students to engage meaningfully in their communities and develop lifelong civic skills. This year’s top honorees are: Natomas Pacific Pathways Prep Elementary School (Sacramento, Sacramento County) South Junior High School (Anaheim, Orange County) Norwalk High School (Norwalk, Los Angeles County) The following schools were recognized with the Award of Merit: Tarpey Elementary School (Clovis, Fresno County) Wangenheim Middle School (San Diego, San Diego County)  Yerba Buena High School (San Jose, Santa Clara County) The following schools were recognized with the Award of Distinction: Wittmann Elementary School (Cerritos, Los Angeles County) Rancho Viejo Middle School (Hemet, Riverside County) Pacific High School (San Bernardino, San Bernardino County) Natomas Pacific Pathways Prep's middle and high school program was honored with an emeritus award in recognition of its continued excellence in civic engagement. Launched in 2013, the award celebrates schools that make space for high‑quality civic learning and engagement. For the first time in several years, the 2026 program asked schools to submit details for how other schools could replicate their top programs. A total of 112 programs were submitted by elementary, middle, and high school educators. Judges from California courts will present the awards in person this September as part of the judicial branch’s Constitution Month commemoration. Chief Justice Guerrero will continue her tradition of visiting schools earning the top Award of Excellence. Judges from the courts of appeal and the superior courts visit honorees in their jurisdictions for the other award categories. About the Civic Learning Awards The Civic Learning Awards program is co‑sponsored by the Chief Justice of California and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The award recognizes schools that embed civic learning into schoolwide practices, including classroom instruction, student-led projects, service learning, and opportunities to take informed action. More information is available at powerofdemocracy.org/civic-learning-award. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-patricia-guerrero-host-law-day-event-sacramento Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero to Host Law Day Event in SacramentoMartin.Novitski Mon, 04/27/2026 - 11:54 News Release For media interested in attending the event, contact Jackie.D'Almeida@jud.ca.gov for RSVP information. SACRAMENTO— Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero will welcome judges, educators, and students to the Third District Court of Appeal on May 1, in celebration of Law Day, a national day recognizing the rule of law and its role in our constitutional democracy. The Law Day event underscores the judiciary’s ongoing commitment to engaging young people, expanding civic knowledge, and strengthening community partnerships across California. Civic Learning Initiative The event is being organized by Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero’s Power of Democracy Civic Learning Initiative. Students from local high schools will deliver oratory pieces on this year’s Law Day theme, “The Rule of Law and the American Dream,” the initiative will release a new Rule of Law classroom lesson available to any K-12 public school that hosts a judge through the Judges in the Classroom program. In addition, the Chief Justice will announce the recipients of the initiative’s 2026 Civic Learning Awards. The program, co-sponsored by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, honors California K–12 schools for exceptional commitment to civic education. This year’s program will focus honors on replicable models that engage students in civics, service learning, and community service. The event will be livestreamed on the Power of Democracy website beginning at 2:30PM, and a recording of the event will be posted on Monday, May 3. More information about the Civic Learning Awards is available at powerofdemocracy.org/civic-learning-award. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/california-chief-justice-delivers-2026-state-judiciary-address California Chief Justice Delivers 2026 State of the Judiciary AddressBalassone, Merrill Mon, 03/23/2026 - 15:21 News Release SACRAMENTO—Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero today delivered the 2026 State of the Judiciary address to the California Legislature. A transcript of her remarks is below, and an archived webcast of the address is available on the California Courts YouTube channel. Watch "Thank you all so much. Thank you Speaker Rivas, Senate President pro Tempore Limón, distinguished statewide constitutional officers and guests. I am proud to be joined here today by my colleagues from the California Supreme Court (and our Clerk and Executive Officer and court staff); justices, judges, and court executives from local courts around the state; members of our Judicial Council; the California Judges Association; the Bench Bar Coalition; and our justice system partners. I thought about different approaches I could take with my remarks this year. With so much going on in our nation—so much controversy, division, uncertainty, and chaos as well—I’ve decided to offer you something different. If anyone is looking for controversial statements or divisive rhetoric, you will not get it. Instead, I offer you normalcy and a calm and measured report regarding the important work our judicial branch has undertaken over this past year, and some of the major issues facing the judiciary. First, I want to commemorate a significant anniversary in the formation of our country. In 1776, our founders boldly declared their independence from Britain and its King, and stated that we are endowed with unalienable rights of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” With force and clarity, they set forth their list of grievances against “the establishment of an absolute Tyranny”—included among their concerns was a statement that the King had “obstructed the Administration of Justice” and “made Judges dependent on his Will alone.” They later offered a different path—establishing our constitutional republic of three separate and coequal branches of government. We must all safeguard this structure and the fundamental principles which form the basis of our government and the promise of this country. This year, the judicial branch plans to celebrate the unique role we play, and the privilege we have, to uphold the rule of law for all who appear before us—without fear or favor, with courage and steadfast commitment to our oath that we have taken to uphold our constitutions. Now we look forward to celebrating our respective roles alongside all of you. Our jobs are made more challenging, however, by the rise in threats against the judiciary—something I’m not sure our founding fathers would have precisely envisioned. The issue of judicial security is prominent in the minds of many judicial officers, and recent events have unfortunately demonstrated that service on the bench can pose significant safety risks. The Judicial Council of California has made judicial security a legislative priority. We need sufficient resources in order to protect “personnel, the public and court systems from physical, online, and cyber threats.” The council also will continue to advocate for legislation designed to protect the privacy of judges—an issue that is fundamentally intertwined with judicial security. A marked increase in negative rhetoric surrounding judges, including from elected officials, has contributed to these concerns. We welcome public scrutiny, transparency, and accountability regarding the legal reasoning reflected in our rulings. Public engagement, whether resulting in praise or criticism for our decisions, is commendable and should be encouraged. We do not, however, welcome divisive name-calling or inaccurate and uninformed accounts about our roles—we believe this serves only to distort the public’s understanding of the judiciary and shake their confidence in our democracy. And we should all emphatically speak out against normalizing personal attacks against judges—for all our sakes. Fortunately in California, we have many examples of how government should work, even in challenging times, and I would like to express my appreciation for your partnership and your support in these areas. I have spoken in the past regarding our three-branch solutions. I would like to touch upon a few examples. Remote Proceedings Since March 2022, over 6 million proceedings have been conducted with remote technology. In a one-year period from September 2024 to August 2025, that represented over 7,000 proceedings per day. Trends in positive experiences with these services have remained consistent over time, at about 95% satisfaction overall. The data unequivocally shows great public interest in having remote options, but existing statutory authority for remote proceedings is scheduled to expire at the end of this year (on January 1, 2027), or precisely I believe in 2027, but I’ll go with the end of the year for all of you. For the benefit of all Californians who see the advantages of technology and choose to appear remotely, I look forward to working with all of you to meet Californians’ needs and expectations in this area. CARE Act Proceedings As you know, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, which you passed in 2022 and which has been implemented in phases through December 2024, is now fully operational in all 58 counties. Between October 2023 and January 2026, there have been a total of 3,810 petitions filed. During that same time, courts ordered 925 CARE agreements and plans; and a further 1,835 individuals are still being actively engaged in these court proceedings. The Judicial Council publishes this CARE Act data on its California Courts website, providing a fuller description of the CARE process for anyone to see. These numbers, understandably, may not be satisfactory to those whose loved ones do not qualify for CARE Act assistance. With the recent expansion of the program to cover bipolar disorders with psychotic features—in addition to the original criteria of schizophrenia spectrum disorders—we do hope to reach more people in need and help redefine what justice looks like for Californians living with certain behavioral health challenges. While this is not a panacea, we can be proud of our partnership in this area. For each person who receives assistance—whether it is through a voluntary agreement or court-ordered plan or other referrals for services—their lives are greatly improved because of the CARE Act. In other words, the volume of petitions filed alone does not fully capture the overall effectiveness of the program. I would like to acknowledge the tireless work of our judges, court staff, and community partners who are managing the CARE Act petitions filed in our courts. As you know, they’re helping individuals with severe mental illness access housing, medication, and recovery services before they fall deeper into crisis. And these courts are not just legal forums, they are bridges to stability, safety, and hope for Californians who need it most. I thank our Governor, each of you in the Legislature, and each of our trial courts for your commitment to exploring ways to help these individuals. In addition to these two areas, I also look forward to partnering with you to address other ongoing, and in some instances, longstanding, issues of concern that are facing our courts. Judicial Positions First starting with our trial courts. We are grateful for the $70 million in ongoing funding that has been proposed in the Governor’s budget for the increasing costs of trial court operations. A longstanding problem our courts face, however, relates to the lack of funding for judgeships in counties with the greatest need. We are updating our judicial needs assessment—but the latest report from October 2022 reflects some stark realities I’d like to provide some context on: In recent years, the judicial branch has received funding for the 50 judgeships that were authorized as far back as 2007 (by AB 159 (Stats. 2007)): Two positions were funded in 2018 and allocated to Riverside County Superior Court; 25 positions were funded in 2019; and 23 positions were funded in 2022. Based on the October 2022 report, there was still a need even at that time for 98 additional judicial officers. While this funding has helped to minimize the gap between the number of authorized judgeships and judicial needs, there are still significant, ongoing challenges and needs that remain—with the need for more judges being especially acute in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.   What this means in practical terms is that justice is not served the way that it should be. As an example, in Riverside County Superior Court, during the period from January 9, 2023 to March 6, 2026, 437 misdemeanor cases and 57 felony cases were dismissed pursuant to Penal Code section 1050, subdivision (j), because of the condition of the court’s congested calendar. This is despite the Judicial Council making available temporary assigned judges when requested by the superior court, to help alleviate the burden on the court. Riverside, as an example again, has the highest use of our temporary assigned judges. Last fiscal year, the total expense associated with these assigned judges in Riverside County alone was about $3M. We will continue to make resources available to the courts through our Temporary Assigned Judges Program, and we look forward to working with all of you to find more permanent, predictable, and sustainable solutions to these challenges.   Artificial Intelligence I’d also like to touch upon AI. The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence continues to present both challenges and opportunities as we work to expand access to justice and improve efficiency across the judicial branch. In 2025, our Artificial Intelligence Task Force developed comprehensive guidance for courts on the responsible use of generative AI tools. The task force is now focusing on deep fakes and the impact of AI on the admissibility of evidence. I think you’ll agree with me that it’s a critical area to maintain integrity and public trust in judicial proceedings.   The Judicial Council approved a new rule of court on the use of generative AI for court-related work by judges and court staff. These guidelines emphasize accuracy, oversight, and transparency, while proactively mitigating risks related to privacy, bias, and security. They also underscore the importance of human judgment in all AI-assisted processes, ensuring that technology complements—rather than replaces—the expertise of our judicial officers.   The judicial branch is laying a strong foundation with its model policies, training programs, and pilot case studies that explore practical applications of AI.   We are committed to working collaboratively with all of you and our stakeholders to ensure that statutory requirements protect the public without unnecessarily restricting the appropriate and beneficial use of AI tools. Our goal is to strike the right balance between innovation and accountability, ensuring technology does not interfere with—but instead enhances—justice.   Impact of Federal Immigration Enforcement on Court Operations Last year, I also spoke about the considerable stress, anxiety, and confusion experienced by many Californians regarding federal immigration policies and enforcement as they intersect with our state courts. I also previously made clear that the federal government, of course, has the right and obligation to do its job but it should conduct its operations in a way that does not interfere with ours. Unfortunately, that has not happened. Public apprehension has continued to grow because of the way federal enforcement action has occurred—including the presence of federal officers in at least 17 of our state courthouses. These developments raise profound questions about access to justice, community trust, and the safety of individuals seeking legal remedies. The Judicial Council has taken proactive steps to address some of these challenges. Over the past year, we have provided extensive training for our courts on federal executive orders, the legal implications of immigration activity at courthouses, and relevant California statutes that are designed to uphold the principle of equal justice under the law. We have collected data informally so that we have a better understanding of the impact on court operations. Next month, the Judicial Council will consider a proposed California Rule of Court that would formalize our information gathering regarding civil arrests at state courthouses. This will help inform next steps as we consider options for protecting against encroachments on our ability to ensure that courts remain open and accessible to everyone. I would like again to reiterate that we can all perform our independent obligations consistent with our constitutional mandates in support of the rule of law, with our courts focusing on being available to everyone. We will continue to do everything within our power to ensure that all members of the public can freely access our state courts, to safeguard individual rights, and to promote the fair and timely administration of justice. State Bar Update I also want to report back on issues I raised last year with respect to the State Bar and the disastrous experience we had with the February 2025 bar exam. I can still say that in a calm and measured way. As you know, the California Supreme Court and the Legislature share an important partnership concerning oversight of the State Bar, with the court managing licensing and disciplinary functions and the Legislature setting the attorney licensing fee and auditing the bar’s governance and finances. For our part, the court has taken several corrective actions on the bar exam: Approved scoring adjustments to the February 2025 exam and an expansion of the Provisional License Program; Ordered the return to in-person testing using the Multistate Bar Exam provided by the National Conference of Bar Examiners; and Amended rules governing the exam and attorney admissions in order to strengthen and clarify the authority of the Committee of Bar Examiners and its role over attorney admissions. The amended rules address question review, validation, and proctoring; subpoena authority; oversight of the Office of Admissions’ budget; fee setting; and mandated cost-benefit analysis before there’s any proposed changes to the exam. It is too soon to report back on the future of the California Bar, but it is safe to say that nobody wants a repeat of what happened last year, and we will keep this experience in mind in determining what additional steps to take when presented with the State Bar’s recommendations in the near future.   Through our collaborative and complementary governance responsibilities, together we will continue to ensure that the public is protected and qualified new attorneys are admitted to the practice of law in our state.   Legislative Visits   I know that the challenges I have highlighted are not coming as a surprise to many of you, or at least I hope they’re not. I believe the courts have been transparent in explaining the difficulties we face and the needs we have in order to properly serve the public.   In addition, we have also invited you to come see the good work our courts do even under often difficult circumstances. Thank you for accepting our invitations to visit our various courts across the state. I know Senator Umberg thanks you too. I see him waving in the back. You guys must agree.   We continue to work with our local trial courts to coordinate legislative visits so that members can experience first-hand our day-to-day court operations—the challenges, innovations, and efficiencies—as well as the opportunity to meet with the committed public servants who provide court services to the constituents in your districts.   Since I last addressed you, we have been pleased to facilitate the visits of at least 15 senators and 22 assemblymembers, who have visited 15 local trial courts; some of you have visited more than once, some to more than one jurisdiction in your district, and some of you have worked directly with your local courts to schedule these visits.   We hope that, through these visits, you can see what I know to be true—we have a strong foundation for overcoming the real challenges we face.   We have over 2,000 dedicated public servants who are committed to the fair and impartial administration of justice. These judges, I believe, are significantly underpaid. The last judicial salary adjustment, separate from any adjustments provided under Government Code section 68203, was 19 years ago in 2007, when judges received an 8.5% increase. Judicial salaries are significantly lower than those of certain California state and local government attorneys, with growing pay differentials worsening over many years. I recognize we face a difficult financial budget this year, but I believe it’s necessary to flag this now because this level of inequity jeopardizes the judicial branch’s ability to attract and retain the best-qualified candidates for the bench. I look forward to discussing this further with you in the near future.   Californians rely on and deserve a judiciary that delivers the highest quality of justice and service. We do this through, not only our daily work in the courtroom, but through our commitment to upholding our ethical duties to maintain independence, integrity, and impartiality; our robust educational requirements; and through outreach efforts like our court’s annual special oral argument sessions at various locations throughout the state, my Power of Democracy Civic Learning Initiative, and countless other training, mentoring, and outreach programs held on a regular basis by courts at every level throughout the state.   This year, in addition to commemorating the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence, we also mark an important milestone for the Judicial Council of California—the 100th year since it was founded through a vote of the people in 1926.   Through the council’s work, we have achieved greater consistency across courts, built a statewide administrative infrastructure, and consistently sought better funding for needed systemic improvements.   I am grateful for the vision, dedication, and hard work of the judicial branch leaders and Judicial Council members who have preceded me to build a strong and accountable judiciary that works collaboratively with our sister branches.   Because of this foundation—stemming from the structures we have in place, and more importantly, the people who are committed to this work—the state of the judiciary is strong, resilient, and committed to the rule of law and equal access to justice for all Californians.   Sister Branches And although my focus, of course, is on the judiciary—I also want to acknowledge two points regarding our sister branches of government.   First, I was so honored to swear in the Senate’s new President pro Tempore Monique Limón earlier this year. In the interest of time, I will not repeat all the “firsts” that her selection represents. But we’re so proud of her. It also has been a true privilege to work with Speaker Robert Rivas since his swearing in in June 2023. I also note this means Latinos are the leaders of two of the three branches of government—the judiciary and both houses in the Legislature—for the first time in California’s history.   Second—Governor Newsom. As he concludes his second term as Governor of our great state at the end of this year, I want to thank him for his thoughtful collaboration with the Legislature and the Judiciary, and for his dedicated service to the state.   I want to acknowledge the Governor for his collaboration on our three-branch solutions to improve access to justice in California, his willingness to listen to the needs and concerns of the judiciary, and his efforts to provide stable ongoing funding for the judicial branch.   Through his outreach efforts to encourage more diverse candidates from a variety of legal backgrounds, our Governor has also diversified California’s judiciary in a meaningful way. Of his 695 judicial appointments—with one more coming soon—more than half have been women, and more than half have been people of color. We thank the Governor for strengthening California’s judiciary.   And we’ll have more time with him—so I look forward to our continued collaboration. And I also look forward to the judiciary’s continued, strong partnership with the Legislature in our shared endeavor to serve the people of our state.   In closing, I would like to again reinforce the importance of our nation’s 250th celebration of our independence. The judiciary remains committed to the same guiding principles which are embodied in that document—equality, unalienable rights, justice, and the rule of law.   With your help, we have made great strides in upholding these principles. And the judiciary remains committed to navigating through the obstacles I have highlighted and safeguarding these principles for all future generations. Thank you for the opportunity to address you."   https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/california-government-leaders-issue-joint-statement-250th-anniversary-declaration-independence California Government Leaders Issue Joint Statement on 250th Anniversary of the Declaration of IndependenceBalassone, Merrill Mon, 03/23/2026 - 09:45 News Release (From left to right) Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, Governor Gavin Newsom, Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero, and Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas. Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero, Governor Gavin Newsom, Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, and Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas issued a joint statement on Monday to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The leaders convened following Chief Justice Guerrero’s fourth State of the Judiciary address to highlight the enduring importance of the nation’s founding ideals and affirming their shared commitment to those principles. This year marks the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, which established our great nation with three separate and coequal branches of government. As the leaders of California’s three branches of government, we affirm our continued dedication to safeguarding the rule of law, and to upholding a government that serves all Californians.” Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero, Governor Gavin Newsom, Senate President pro Tempore Monique Limón, and Speaker of the Assembly Robert Rivas signed the 250th Anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence Resolution, as the leaders of California's three branches of government. Read the transcript of Chief Justice Guerrero’s State of the Judiciary address. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/california-chief-justice-releases-statement-governors-budget-proposal-4 California Chief Justice Releases Statement on Governor's Budget ProposalBalassone, Merrill Fri, 01/09/2026 - 11:08 News Release California Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero on Friday issued the following statement on the Governor’s budget proposal for the judicial branch: I appreciate Governor Newsom’s ongoing support of the judicial branch to ensure Californians continue to have access to critical services even during these challenging budget times.   The Governor’s budget proposal includes much-needed investments to keep up with the rising costs of trial court operations, to increase funding for court-appointed appellate counsel representing indigent defendants, to reduce case backlogs and workload pressures in our appellate courts, and to advance critically needed new courthouse projects.   As the budget is finalized in the coming months, we are committed to working collaboratively with the Governor’s administration and the Legislature to secure the resources necessary for the judicial branch to fulfill our mission of providing access to justice for all Californians.” https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-patricia-guerrero-issues-statement-judicial-branch-budget-1 Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero Issues Statement on Judicial Branch BudgetKaren.Datangel Tue, 07/01/2025 - 10:03 News Release California Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero today issued a statement on the judicial branch budget for fiscal year 2025-26:  During this challenging fiscal time, I appreciate the Governor’s and the Legislature’s commitment to maintaining critical judicial branch programs and services.  The funding provided for our courts—including support for language access, treatment court programs, court-appointed counsel, and facilities improvements—helps us perform our functions as a coequal branch for the benefit of communities throughout the state.  The judicial branch worked with our sister branches of government on budget solutions during this difficult time and we will continue that partnership as we implement efficiencies and safeguard equal access to justice for all Californians. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/california-chief-justice-delivers-2025-state-judiciary-address California Chief Justice Delivers 2025 State of the Judiciary AddressCorren, Blaine Tue, 03/18/2025 - 09:47 News Release SACRAMENTO—Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero today delivered the 2025 State of the Judiciary address to the California Legislature. A transcript of her remarks is below, and an archived webcast of the address is available on the California Courts YouTube channel. Watch               Thank you, Senate President Pro Tem McGuire, Speaker Rivas, distinguished statewide constitutional officers and guests, and, of course, Governor Newsom. Thank you for the opportunity to deliver my State of the Judiciary Address to a joint session of the California State Legislature. I am very proud to be joined once again by my colleagues from the California Supreme Court (and our CEO and court staff); justices, judges, and court executives from local courts around the state; members of the Judicial Council; the California Judges Association; the Bench Bar Coalition; and our justice system stakeholders and partners. Much has happened since I addressed you last year. I decided to start with an understatement. In March of last year, I emphasized the Judicial Branch’s priority with respect to advocating for a stable budget that the courts can count on to make public access to justice a reality in all 58 counties. In May, we were faced with $97 million in reductions at the trial court level and the prospect of up to 7.95% reductions for other parts of the Judicial Branch. I expressed the Judicial Branch’s commitment to doing our part to address the State Budget deficit, while working diligently to mitigate and manage the impacts to the courts and to the public of this current fiscal year’s budget cuts. It was definitely challenging—our courts found efficiencies but also had to implement some tough solutions. Necessary actions included closing courtrooms and courthouses, implementing some form of furloughs, and reducing hours for self-help and clerk’s office services. But we appreciated the opportunity to maintain an ongoing dialogue with our sister branches of government regarding the details of our budget. And I am pleased to say that following the Governor’s Proposed Budget in January of this year, courts have reported that the partially restored funding should help by: Reducing hiring freezes and delays;   Reducing service impacts; and   Preventing, eliminating, or scaling back on planned furloughs. Unfortunately, much uncertainty remains. Nonetheless, we remain committed to working with the Governor’s administration and the Legislature in the coming months as plans for the Budget Act are finalized. We know and appreciate that you all face hard choices and that you weigh competing demands for scarce resources as you review the Proposed Budget. It is our hope that you will continue to keep in mind the fundamental reason we seek our share of the budget. The mission, as you heard, of the Judicial Branch is to resolve disputes, and to interpret and apply the law consistently, impartially, and independently to protect the rights and liberties guaranteed by both the federal and state constitutions, in a fair, accessible, effective, and efficient manner. We need funding to properly fulfill this solemn responsibility— as a coequal branch of government—to safeguard the constitutional rights and liberties of all Californians. In my third year as Chief Justice, I’m energized to be driving forward with the conviction of my own sworn oath to protect and defend the constitutions—guided, as all of our judges are, by a dedication to the rule of law, and inspired by the desire to give back, to deliver equal access to justice for all Californians. We, of course, do not do our work on behalf of the public alone. I want to emphasize how important it is that all three branches of government in California are here together today. This reflects our commitment to work collaboratively, with civility, and with mutual respect, on behalf of the people that we serve. Our relationships are informed by an understanding of our distinct roles and duties, protected by the checks and balances inherent in our democratic system of government, and strengthened by our personal commitment to the rule of law. I know that you share that commitment. I’ve had the privilege of administering oaths of office to many public servants—including many of you here today. The oaths we take represent the key pillars of our constitutional democracy—as we affirm to support and to defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of California. This foundation supports a healthy climate of productive public discourse, and thoughtful and thorough deliberation on issues that impact our state, our counties, our communities, our families, and others. Because of this foundation of justice, no one is above the law, no one is outside of the law, and no one is excluded from its rights and protections. And so with these principles in mind, I stand here proud to say that the state of the judiciary remains strong, and that we are ready, willing, and able to uphold our responsibilities and play our role to benefit the people who we serve in California. I also spoke last year of three-branch solutions. I believe that concept continues to be of utmost importance. That is why I encouraged judges throughout the state to engage with their local senators and assemblymembers to foster communication between our two branches. And I continue to encourage all of you to meet with court leadership and staff in your home districts and to experience firsthand the services and access they provide to all of your constituents. Since my address last year, at least 19 legislators spent time visiting nine local trial courts in their districts. I was pleased to be joined by President Pro Tem McGuire on a visit to the Superior Court of Mendocino County, and by Speaker Rivas on a visit to the Superior Court of Monterey County last year. These visits create a greater understanding of the operational challenges facing courts and how courts focus on efficiencies and innovations and efficiencies to better serve the public. You will see firsthand the great benefits of remote proceedings. You didn’t think I’d get through this without mentioning remote proceedings. Each business day, more than 6,500 remote hearings, civil and criminal, take place in our courts, saving court users an estimated 1.5 million trips to courthouses annually. Remote proceedings have been universally praised by both court staff and court users—as both time and cost savers—and most importantly, because the option to appear remotely gives litigants a choice about how they access their court system. I want to acknowledge and thank you for listening to our pleas for an extension of remote proceedings. Through budget trailer bills, we now have statutory authorization for criminal and civil remote proceedings until January 1, 2027. Through your visits to our courts, you will also see and hear from the dedicated judges, court executive officers, attorneys, and staff who help make up the face of the judiciary. They are talented, hard-working, dedicated public servants who constantly respond to increasing workload demands. And I am proud to serve alongside of them. Currently, we have about 67 judicial vacancies. I had to update the number since yesterday. We are grateful to the Governor and his Judicial Appointments Secretary for their ongoing work to fill these vacancies. As was recently reported, with nearly two years left in his term, Governor Newsom has already appointed 586 judges—including 131 in 2024—putting him on track to surpass prior administrations. We are all beneficiaries of Governor Newsom’s commitment to identifying and appointing excellent judges and leaving a lasting imprint on the state judiciary. Thank you Governor. I also would like to commend the proposal to provide long-overdue funding to support the Court-Appointed Counsel Programs for our Courts of Appeal and our California Supreme Court. They support an important need to provide effective, efficient, and experienced counsel for appellants with death judgments and indigent defendants on appeal. This funding is critical to attract and retain qualified counsel and to help rebuild the statewide panel of attorneys whose work is fundamental to the effective administration of justice. As with all the funding we receive, we recognize that we must be good stewards of the resources we seek. As part of our role in three branch solutions, I am committed to transparency and accountability with the public funds allocated to the Judicial Branch. Courts are enhancing caseflow management and case resolution for the workload reporting that we provide to you. At our April Judicial Council meeting, we will receive a report on our weighted caseload model—this helps us to accurately assess resource needs and equitably allocate the resources you provide. We seek to provide improved data collection and analysis that prioritizes actual level of effort and time to resolve cases over basic raw filings data. We know that raw filings fell during the pandemic, and that filings are now rising once again. But even more significantly—the complexity of the workload for courts has exponentially increased. We measure workloads using a “caseweight” methodology developed by the National Center for State Courts, and used in at least 30 other states, which allows us to consider both case volume and case complexity. For example, between 2017 and 2025, preliminary data shows that caseweights have risen 54% for felonies, 95% for juvenile cases, and 26% for conservatorship and guardianship proceedings. These are dramatic, fundamental shift that impacts our work. The law evolves each year as your branch identifies important policy issues that must be addressed—ranging from important issues such as various ameliorative laws touching upon important issues such as post-judgement resentencing, Juvenile Justice Diversion, Collaborative Justice, and the Racial Justice Act—as well as measures reflecting the will of the people through ballot measures such as Prop 36. These and other factors all affect the courts’ case volume, mix, and complexity and increases their workload. I look forward to providing the results of our Resource Assessment Study with you soon. As we update and refine our post-pandemic data to establish solid baselines for our workload, resources, and judicial needs, we will continue to advocate for judgeships in those counties that need it the most, including San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. And we will continue to focus on enhancing education and training for all of our judicial officers—so that we can deliver the highest quality of justice and service to the public—and to maintain the highest standards of professionalism, ethics, and performance. We also continue to focus on other key issues and programs of mutual interest and concern. And I’d like to touch on a few of those now. Since I delivered my last State of the Judiciary, our trial courts in all 58 counties have now implemented the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act. Under the CARE Act, the courts continue to collaborate with the California Health and Human Services Agency to deliver mental health treatment, housing support, and other services through a civil court process for persons with schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders who often experience homelessness or incarceration without treatment.   As of February 21, courts have received 1,258 CARE Act petitions and held 2,092 hearings. The numbers continue to improve. And the numbers do not tell the full story. Behind the metrics are real people, real individuals, families, and communities benefitting from the act.   And the holistic approach of unifying and coordinating public services, as has been done with our Collaborative Justice Courts, yields other benefits—because there are some who might not be eligible for the CARE Act who are nonetheless receiving referrals to other services to meet their specific needs. Through these efforts, we are seeing significant improvement in assisting Californians struggling with mental health issues. When I spoke with you last year, I also stated that our court system must address the many issues presented by the developing field of artificial intelligence in a deliberative fashion. Since then, I appointed a task force led by Administrative Presiding Justice Brad Hill, who will continue to work with Administrative Presiding Justice Mary Greenwood and Judge Arturo Castro, as well as members of the Judicial Council on this ever-evolving issue.   The task force has developed a Model Use Policy that outlines the guardrails for safely using generative AI. They have just circulated a draft Rule of Court for public comment and this we hope will ensure that court users are protected as the branch begins to implement generative AI—and the Judicial Council will vote on a recommended rule later this year. The task force has also developed guidance for judges using generative AI in their adjudicative role. Stay tuned as this issue continues to evolve. Through funding you provided, we also launched the California Court Interpreter Workforce Pilot Program this fiscal year. The program covers training costs and exam fees for aspiring court interpreters with a commitment to work for the courts for at least three years after they pass all required exams.   19 courts are participating. More than 1,000 applications have been received from interested candidates. 126 candidates are in the program currently, and the application cycle opens again this month.   Because this is a five-year pilot, we believe that the program will help address the growing need for qualified interpreters to serve California court users with limited-English proficiency. Next, the Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) programs support trained volunteers appointed by a judicial officer to advocate for children who are under the jurisdiction of a juvenile court. Volunteers spend time with children, monitoring their service needs, and provide child-focused recommendations to the court based on the best interest of the child.   We have forty-five CASA programs in 52 counties; they serve 10,600 children with 7,400 trained volunteers, and we appreciate your ongoing support of this program. The council and the courts are also collaborating with the California Department of Social Services to focus on a “Kin-First” Culture—the term used to describe a system that prioritizes placing children with their extended family network. These efforts are ongoing in Santa Cruz, Sacramento, Solano, and Kern Counties. And in San Diego County, this approach has seen an increase of 10% in children being safely placed with family. And through our Judicial Branch Facilities Program, we seek to design and construct functional, economical, and secure contemporary court facilities for all of these court users and members of their local communities. With your support, in the past year, the Judicial Council has successfully completed two new public buildings—in Shasta County and Riverside County. Construction continues on three projects anticipated to be completed this year, and one in 2026. And in light of recent attacks and threats to courthouses, we continue to evaluate existing facilities to identify physical security improvements to make those courthouses safer for the public, judicial officers and court staff, and justice system partners. Through all of these changes and improvements, the Judicial Branch is demonstrating its ability to play our role in effectively and efficiently serving the people of California. Sometimes we face significant challenges along the way. The recent administration of the California Bar Exam comes to mind. As you know, the California Supreme Court and the Legislature share an important partnership concerning oversight of the State Bar, with the court managing licensing and disciplinary functions and the Legislature setting the attorney licensing fee and auditing the bar’s governance and finances. Over the past three years, in light of high-profile failures to address attorney misconduct, we both have implemented reforms to address attorney accountability and to improve the State Bar’s operations. The court has implemented conflict-of-interest screening for key positions within the State Bar, implemented transparency measures to ensure that seated bar leaders annually disclose conflicts of interest, and approved a new rule of professional conduct that requires attorneys to report other attorneys for serious acts of misconduct. And the Legislature undertook its important role in auditing the agency’s disciplinary system and finances, updating the agency’s disqualification standards, and creating a diversion program for lesser violations of attorney misconduct. And this partnership will continue as we investigate the failures surrounding the administration of the bar exam last month. We understand the high stakes that are involved—for students who want to pursue a career and their dream of joining the legal profession, for those who hope to devote their talent and skills to helping others, for those who need the financial stability and independence that will come from jobs that depend on their ability to pass the exam. It is literally life-changing for many students. The additional stress, frustration, and anxiety faced by some examinees is inexcusable. For all those who had to endure these failures, I want to assure you that our court will exercise its plenary authority to implement appropriate remedies to help mitigate the harm. In response to these unfortunate circumstances, the court plans to enhance oversight over admissions, including the role of the Committee of Bar Examiners, to ensure high standards and improve the administration of future bar exams. Even before the founding of our State Bar, the court depended on the Committee of Bar Examiners to set high standards for entrance into the practice of law. But in recent years, the examiners’ role has been diminished. I intend to explore restoring the examiners’ importance in these matters by increasing their oversight of the admissions process, including its budget and the administration of the bar exam. Just as we trust the examiners to develop and enforce high standards to become an attorney, we should also entrust them to develop and enforce high standards to determine whether a vendor can administer an online bar exam without incident. Our applicants deserve a rigorous and thoughtful process for ensuring that they sit for an exam that fairly measures their legal skills. We hope that these students who pass the bar will all succeed, and as they do so, we hope they will commit to providing pro bono services to the most vulnerable among us. Nonprofits and pro bono providers can help ensure that low-income Californians have access to essential civil legal services. Like all pro bono providers, they should have our support and the freedom to represent those in need of their legal services, without fear of retribution or unwarranted criticism which threatens to have a chilling effect on the nature of the work they are willing to undertake. I would also like to address the considerable stress, anxiety, and confusion surrounding the issue of immigration policies and enforcement as they relate to our courts. The federal government, of course, has the right and obligation to do its job but it cannot (consistent with the Tenth Amendment) compel states to enforce federal immigration law. You have passed laws making this clear, including SB 54 regarding the sharing of certain information with immigration officials, and AB 668 which codifies the common law privilege against civil arrests in a courthouses in California without a judicial warrant. These laws have been upheld against various challenges. And in fact, the federal government’s own guidance document recognizes these important limitations—specifying such civil immigration enforcement actions should not occur in jurisdictions like California which prevent it. None of this means state officials or judicial officers have any intent to violate federal laws that prevent anyone from “conceal[ing], harbor[ing], or shield[ing] from detection” those who are in our country illegally, particularly those who commit violent felonies. Rather, we can all perform our independent obligations consistent with our constitutional mandates in support of the rule of law. The federal government can focus on federal immigration enforcement within the confines of the constitution; local officials can focus on local public safety; and our courts can focus on providing access to justice to every single person who comes before us. It is within our purview to ensure that all members of the public can freely access our state courts, to safeguard individual rights, and to promote the fair and timely administration of justice; we will safeguard our authority and responsibility to do so. So I will close with the same general thoughts I opened with this year: The Judicial Branch remains steadfast in its commitment to provide fair and impartial justice in accordance with our constitutional obligations. And as we do so—whether we are talking about our financial operations, key issues and programs of mutual interest, or broader issues of public concern—I look forward with energy, enthusiasm, and commitment to working collaboratively with you as we continue to serve the public. Thank you for your attention. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-issues-statement-passing-justice-edward-panelli Chief Justice Issues Statement on Passing of Justice Edward Panelli Balassone, Merrill Mon, 07/22/2024 - 10:10 News Release Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero issued a statement on Justice Edward Panelli, who passed away Saturday at age 92. Justice Panelli served on the California Supreme Court from 1985 to 1994: Justice Edward Panelli served with honor and integrity over a long legal career and as a distinguished member of our California Supreme Court. His unwavering commitment to justice and fairness was rooted in his humble upbringing as the child of immigrants, earning him the respect and admiration of his colleagues and the broader legal community. I extend our deepest condolences to Justice Panelli's family and friends as we mourn the loss of a great jurist and beloved member of our court. His memory and impact on the legal community will endure.” https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-patricia-guerrero-issues-statement-judicial-branch-budget Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero Issues Statement on Judicial Branch Budget Balassone, Merrill Fri, 06/28/2024 - 11:55 News Release California Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero today issued a statement on the judicial branch budget for 2024-25: We understand that our state is facing difficult fiscal times and we remain committed to doing our part to help address the statewide budget deficit. That said, we are concerned that these cuts to the judicial branch budget will have real impacts on operations, services, and access for everyone seeking to resolve disputes or assert their legal rights in our courts. We will work diligently to mitigate and manage impacts to the courts and to the public.” https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-issues-statement-governors-may-budget-revise-1 Chief Justice Issues Statement on Governor's May Budget ReviseBalassone, Merrill Fri, 05/10/2024 - 11:00 News Release California Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero on Friday issued the following statement on Governor Gavin Newsom's revised budget proposal for the judicial branch: We understand that the current fiscal climate requires Governor Newsom to accelerate budget cost reduction strategies across all of state government and are concerned about the impact these cuts will have on protecting critical court programs and services. The entire state court system remains steadfast in our commitment to preserving equal access to justice for all Californians. I remain committed to working with the Governor’s administration and the Legislature as we all work towards a final state budget."