https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/ en https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/california-courts-make-language-used-jury-service-more-gender-inclusive California Courts to Make Language Used in Jury Service More Gender Inclusivenatalie.l.ston… Thu, 06/25/2026 - 12:23 Feature This summer, the California courts are updating language used in jury service materials to be more gender inclusive, like changing the phrase “his or her jury service” to “a person’s jury service.” The updates help minimize gender bias and create a more welcoming environment for transgender jurors, nonbinary jurors, or other jurors that may not identify with the traditional gender binary. Approximately 220,000 transgender and nonbinary adults live in California. Updates to Jury Service Standards, Rules, and Forms  Earlier this year, the Judicial Council’s Advisory Committee on Providing Access and Fairness made recommendations to improve gender inclusivity in jury materials. Following those recommendations, the council adopted a new standard of judicial administration (a guideline for the courts) and updated three rules of court, two juror forms, and sample scripts used in jury selection.  “Building a welcoming environment for every juror fosters public trust in the justice system,” says San Francisco County Judge Michael Rhoads, a council member and a member of the council's Advisory Committee on Providing Access and Fairness. “The Judicial Council’s important work ensures that our juries represent the people they serve.  When people from all backgrounds feel respected and empowered to participate, our courts and our communities are stronger.” The new standard of judicial administration provides the courts with ways to promote gender inclusivity, including:  Avoid assuming the gender of a juror who has not indicated the pronouns they use.   Avoid seeking information about the gender of jurors unless it is necessary or relevant.   If it is necessary or relevant, provide jurors with the option to indicate their gender identity or expression, allowing for multiple selections and a write-in option.  The council also made updates to specific phrases in rules for court proceedings. The phrases include using “a person’s jury service” instead of “his or her jury service,” “prospective juror” instead of “mother” for potential deferrals of jury service due to breastfeeding, and “the prospective juror” instead of “himself or herself” for potential deferrals of jury service due to financial burden.  Other updates to optional questionnaires for prospective jurors included removing a question asking about the sex of a juror’s children and changing referrals to a juror’s parents, spouse, or significant other to gender-neutral terms. Lastly, the council amended two existing standards of judicial administration, which provide scripts for judges to use during jury selection. The changes include expanding the list of characteristics that might be subject to bias and using gender-neutral terms to refer to judges, attorneys, or others in the courtroom. Education for Judges on Gender Inclusivity  In addition to updating its standards and rules, the council also revised several reference materials for judges about ensuring access for LGBTQ+ people. The updated materials cover subjects like using inclusive language and pronouns, considerations for LGBTQ+ youth, and general best practices for inclusion of LGBTQ+ people during court proceedings. Council and Courts Have Long Recognized the Importance of Language Gender-inclusive language not only serves transgender and nonbinary communities but historically has helped endorse the inclusion of women in legal, professional, and social spaces.  Many words in the English language are masculinized, such as freshman, manpower, policeman, or congressman. Over the years, some of these words have been updated, like police officer or congressperson, to reflect the presence and contributions of women and other people that don’t identify as male.  Recognizing the importance of this type of language, more than 30 years ago the council adopted new rules of court to help address this issue. The council updated jury instructions to include “she” and “her” pronouns to refer to jurors, attorneys, and litigants. This helped diminish the gender bias that only men were participating in the judicial process. In addition to updating jury instructions, the council approved 66 other recommendations from its Advisory Committee on Gender Bias in the Courts. Judicial Council Committed to Providing Access and Fairness The council’s Advisory Committee on Providing Access and Fairness makes recommendations for improving access to the judicial system, fairness in the state courts, diversity in the judicial branch, and court services for self-represented parties. Key projects of this advisory body are outlined in its annual agenda. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-appoints-8-new-judicial-council-members-0 Chief Justice Appoints 8 New Judicial Council MembersCorren, Blaine Thu, 06/18/2026 - 12:45 News Release Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero appointed four new voting members and four new advisory (non-voting) members to the Judicial Council. Under the leadership of the Chief Justice and in accordance with the California Constitution, the council is responsible for ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice. The following two members of the council begin their terms July 1: Administrative Presiding Justice Mary J. Greenwood (voting member), Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District, oversees the daily administration of her appellate district. In this role, she contributes to the statewide administration of the appellate courts on issues including budget, personnel, and facilities. Before joining the appellate bench, Justice Greenwood was the assistant supervising judge of the Family Division of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, where she chaired the Self-Represented Litigant and Community Access Committee and served on the Supervising Judges Committee. (more bio information)   Chad Finke (non-voting, advisory member), court executive officer for the Superior Court of Alameda County, has 25 years of judicial branch experience, with expertise in court operations, human resources, labor relations, finance, and policy analysis. Finke spent eight years at the Judicial Council, including three years as a division director. He currently serves on the council’s Court Executives Advisory Committee and Trial Court Budget Advisory Committee, as well as the National Criminal History Improvement Project. (more bio information) The following six members of the council begin their terms September 15: Judge Eric J. Wersching (voting member), Superior Court of Orange County, serves as the supervising judge of the court’s family law panel. In addition to his administrative responsibilities on the panel, he adjudicates disputes involving marital property, child custody, parenting time, domestic violence, and surrogacies. Judge Wersching is vice-chair of the Judicial Council’s Court Facilities Advisory Committee, chairs that advisory committee’s Court Standards Working Group, and is a member of the Superior Court of Orange County’s Finance Committee, Security Committee, and Supervising Judges Committee. (more bio information)   Presiding Judge Rodney A. Cortez (non-voting, advisory member), Superior Court of San Bernardino County, has previously served as assistant presiding judge, supervising judge of the San Bernardino Justice Center criminal division, and supervising judge of the Joshua Tree courthouse. He also served three terms on the Superior Court of San Bernardino County’s appellate division and was also the court’s judicial sponsor of the pretrial release program. In addition, Judge Cortez served as chair of the court’s Criminal Committee, Security Advisory Committee, Pretrial Release Committee, Probation Committee, and Budget Committee. He has also served on the Judicial Council’s Court Security Advisory Committee. (more bio information)   Judge Nicole C. Bershon (non-voting, advisory member), Superior Court of Los Angeles County, is appointed to the council as the president of the California Judges Association (CJA). She presides over a family law home court and previously oversaw a community collaborative court that focused on providing alternatives to incarceration for at-risk populations. Judge Bershon has served on the Superior Court of Los Angeles County's Executive, Community Outreach, Court Security, Jury, and Temporary Judge Committees. Prior to her appointment as a judge, she served as a court commissioner for two years. (more bio information)   Commissioner Benjamin J. Cassady (non-voting, advisory member), Superior Court of Sacramento County, adjudicates traffic, small claims, and unlawful detainer cases, after more than a year of presiding over Sacramento County’s Night Court calendar for in-custody arraignments and pretrial release. He is also a founding member of the Superior Court of Sacramento County’s Artificial Intelligence Committee. Commissioner Cassady serves on the Judicial Council’s Civil Law Curriculum Committee and previously served on the council’s Information and Technology Advisory Committee. (more bio information)   Marta A. Alcumbrac (voting member), an attorney at Nemecek & Cole in Los Angeles, focuses on the defense of lawyers in complex litigation, including legal malpractice, conflict of interest, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, abuse of process, defamation, and malicious prosecution matters. She is a certified specialist in legal malpractice law and has represented lawyers and law firms in legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty cases for more 25 years. She is a member of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Lawyers’ Professional Liability, Los Angeles County Bar Association Board of Trustees, and serves on the Judicial Council’s Civil and Small Claims Advisory Committee. (more bio information)   Alekxia L. Torres Stallings (voting member), an attorney and managing partner at Torres | Torres Stallings in Bakersfield, specializes in state and federal criminal defense and has served on many court-related committees at both the state and federal levels. She serves as a liaison to the Superior Court of Kern County’s Pretrial Assessment Committee. She also served as president of the Kern County Bar Association, which included membership on the bar association’s Judicial Appointment Evaluation Committee, the county’s local equivalent of the statewide Committee for Judicial Nominee Evaluation. (more bio information) More bio information on the new Judicial Council members The following members have been reappointed to the council effective September 15: Justice Carol A. Corrigan, Supreme Court of CaliforniaJudge Bunmi O. Awoniyi, Superior Court of Sacramento CountyJudge Charles Crompton, Superior Court of San Francisco CountyJudge Ann C. Moorman, Superior Court of Mendocino CountyClerk/Executive Officer Charles Johnson, Court of Appeal, First Appellate DistrictCourt Executive Officer Kate Bieker, Superior Court of Ventura County Departing Council Members Council members concluding their terms this year include Justice Joan K. Irion, Presiding Judge Patricia L. Kelly, Judge Maureen F. Hallahan, Judge Jeffrey C. Kauffman, Commissioner Ryan Davis, Court Executive Officer Darrel E. Parker, Senator Thomas J. Umberg, Attorney Rachel W. Hill, and Attorney Gretchen M. Nelson. Judicial Council Membership According to the state constitution, the Chief Justice chairs the Judicial Council and appoints one other Supreme Court justice, three justices from the courts of appeal, 10 trial court judges, two non-voting court administrators, and any other non-voting members as determined by the voting membership of the council. The State Bar’s governing body appoints four members, and the state senate and assembly each appoint one member. Council Members are volunteers and do not receive additional compensation for their service. Most members serve three-year terms, and each year about a third of the membership rotates off and a new group is sworn in. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/leadership-perspectives-chief-justice-ronald-m-george-100-years-judicial-council Leadership Perspectives: Chief Justice Ronald M. George on 100 Years of the Judicial CouncilCorren, Blaine Mon, 06/08/2026 - 10:51 Feature In celebration of the council’s 100th anniversary, former California Chief Justices and Judicial Council Administrative Directors offered their perspectives on the importance of the council and its mission to enhance access to justice. Their perspectives help show how the council evolved into a critical institution that promotes consistency across courts, elevates service to the public, and enhances the experience of those who rely on our justice system. California Chief Justice Ronald M. George California Chief Justice Ronald M. George (Ret.)In his role as Chief Justice from 1996-2011, George served as chair of the Judicial Council of California. In a recent interview, George answered questions about his time leading the council, including his biggest accomplishments as well as his greatest challenges. “The things I'm most proud of in my role as chair of the Judicial Council would be having the judiciary be in fact, and in perception, a separate and co-equal branch of government,” said Chief Justice George. Despite courts being part of a single judicial branch, he added that “it's so important to appreciate the enormous diversity in conditions among the courts” and that “diversity demands diverse solutions to meet local needs, and that the courts can adopt and adapt from what each court has done. We all learn from each other.” See the full interview with Chief Justice George on the Celebrating 100 Years of the Judicial Council of California website. More interviews in this leadership perspectives series will be posted in the next few months. ___________________________________________________________________________ History, Timeline, Videos, and Exhibit Further Highlight Impact of Judicial CouncilComplementing the judicial leader perspectives, additional resources on the 100th anniversary website help explain the council’s impact on California’s judicial branch and the residents who rely on the justice system: The Judicial Council of California: The First 100 Years (1926–2026): Narrative history of the council, which has helped to solidify the judicial branch and improve court services for the public. 100 Milestones for 100 Years: Interactive timeline highlights some of the actions taken or supported by the Judicial Council to improve the court system and enhance the administration of justice. Video: How the Judicial Council Is Transforming the Court Experience: Showcases just a few of the council’s transformative initiatives, including self-help services; language access support; remote access; and building modern and secure new courthouses. Council Leadership: Bios of previous Chief Justices and council Administrative Directors, as well as a list of Judicial Council members who have served from 1926 to 2026. Videos: Public Servants of California's Judicial Branch: Videos highlight some of California's dedicated public servants, who speak about why they choose to serve in the judicial branch and with the council. 100th Anniversary Archive Exhibit: Historical photos, publications, and other memorabilia from the council that highlight key milestones and achievements in expanding access to justice over the past century. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/publicservice-2026 Chief Justice, Judicial Council Honor Public Servants of California's Judicial BranchKaren.Datangel Mon, 05/04/2026 - 11:22 News Release Chief Justice of California Patricia Guerrero and the Judicial Council of California today mark their fourth annual celebration of Public Service Recognition Week. Said Chief Justice Guerrero: "As we mark the Judicial Council's one hundredth year, we honor those who built and who sustain this constitutional entity, and a judiciary that continues to evolve with the people it serves. As the third branch of government, our commitment remains firm to serve all Californians and uphold the rule of law as a cornerstone of our democracy. I am grateful to the more than 20,000 public servants across our state’s judicial branch who dedicate themselves to these principles every day." Public Service Recognition Week is celebrated annually during the first week of May to honor the people who serve our nation as federal, state, county, local, and tribal government employees. Videos produced by the Judicial Council highlight six of California's dedicated public servants, who speak about why they choose to serve in the judicial branch and with the council. JUDGE BUNMI AWONIYI Judge at the Sacramento Superior Court and council member:   JAYME LEE Associate analyst in the council’s Leadership Support Services office supporting various high-level projects: JAKE CHATTERS Court executive officer at the Placer Superior Court and chair of the council’s Data Analytics Advisory Committee: JAGAN SINGH Deputy director in the council's Facilities Services office, overseeing courthouse construction and modernization projects: JUDGE JUDITH DULCICH Judge at the Kern Superior Court and council member:   MARTHA WRIGHT Manager in the council's Criminal Justice Services office supporting collaborative justice courts, traffic fines and fees, and pretrial services: View all videos on YouTube, including the "We Choose to Serve..." montage. About the Judicial Council of California The Judicial Council is the policymaking body of the California courts, the largest court system in the nation. Under the leadership of the Chief Justice and in accordance with the California Constitution, the council is responsible for ensuring the consistent, independent, impartial, and accessible administration of justice. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/legal-history-asian-american-pacific-islander-experience-california Legal History of Asian American Pacific Islander Experience in CaliforniaKaren.Datangel Fri, 05/01/2026 - 15:12 Feature The state judicial branch's strategic plan includes the goal of Access, Fairness, Diversity, and Inclusion, where "The makeup of California’s judicial branch will reflect the diversity of the state’s residents." According to the Judicial Council’s latest annual judicial demographics report, the number of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders has slowly increased over the last 18 years. As of Dec. 31, 2025, Asian Americans made up 11.9% of judges in California, compared to 4.4% in 2006, while Pacific Islanders made up 0.2% of judges in California, compared to 0.1% in 2006.  Since taking office in 2019 through 2025, Governor Gavin Newsom made 576 judicial appointments – including 131 in 2024 – from a pool of 1,898 applicants. Of those appointments, 17.3% identify as Asian and 0.8% identify as Pacific Islander. This May, California courts and the Judicial Council of California join the nation in recognizing Asian American Pacific Islander Heritage Month. If you are not able to view the timeline below, click here. This feature was originally published on May 2, 2024. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/judicial-council-approves-mandatory-reporting-civil-arrests-court-facilities Judicial Council Approves Mandatory Reporting of Civil Arrests in Court FacilitiesCorren, Blaine Fri, 04/24/2026 - 12:44 News Release VIA WEB CONFERENCE—Judicial Council members approved a new rule at their April 24 business meeting that requires courts to report civil arrests—such as those related to federal immigration enforcement actions—that happen in superior court facilities. The new rule aims to help the judicial branch better understand the impacts civil arrests in court facilities have on courts and access to justice and assist the branch in responding to court or community concerns. Sharif Elmallah, court executive officer for the Butte Superior Court, told council members about an incident at the Oroville courthouse where federal agents conducted a day-long enforcement operation and took several people into custody. “When people avoid court facilities out of fear, the court system cannot serve them and cannot function as intended,” said Elmallah, who also serves as co-chair of the council’s Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee and Court Executives Advisory Committee Joint Rules Subcommittee. “That affects the victim seeking protection under the law, witnesses whose testimony may be critical for parties to present their cases, and litigants who depend on their participation.” The new rule says reports should include, if known, the location of the arrest at the court facility, the law enforcement agency that conducted the arrest, whether any individuals were taken into custody, and if the arresting officer presented a judicial warrant. “The goal of rule 10.440 is data collection,” said Judge Scott R. L. Young, co-chair of the council’s Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee and Court Executives Advisory Committee Joint Rules Subcommittee. “The Judicial Council can and should understand where, and how, civil arrest activity occurs.” The rule goes into effect May 1, and courts will start reporting the information on civil arrests in court facilities to the council in June. The council expects to start posting the information on a publicly available dashboard in July. Watch video of this agenda item Other Items on Council Meeting Agenda: Representation for Children and Families in Dependency Proceedings: The council approved redistributions of court-appointed juvenile dependency counsel funds for fiscal year 2025-26. The allocations promote equitable distribution of resources and support effective representation for children and families in dependency proceedings. After the initial proposal for allocating the unspent dependency counsel funding was submitted to the council, another court identified $150,000 for reallocation. A revised council report will reflect the updated amount of available unspent dependency counsel funding, which increases from $980,773 to $1,130,773. Watch video of this agenda item Appointment of Counsel in Capital Cases: The council received a report from the 2025 Proposition 66 Counsel Working Group, which examined the appointment of attorneys for petitioners in capital habeas corpus proceedings in both the superior courts and the Courts of Appeal. The report provides strategies judicial branch entities could use to recruit and appoint counsel for petitioners in such proceedings, which includes advocating for appellate counsel funding and reactivating regional committees to assist superior courts in their efforts to recruit attorneys to take these cases. Watch video of this agenda item California Access to Justice Commission: The council heard a presentation from the California Access to Justice Commission on how for 30 years it has supported courts, the bar, and justice system stakeholders with research, reports, and support for the expansion of access to justice through legal services, self-help centers, navigators and small claims advisors, remote court services and proceedings, language assistance, libraries, and other community agencies and services. In addition, the council appointed Sacramento County Judge Andi Mudryk to one of the three positions on the commission appointed by the council. Watch video of this agenda item Gender Inclusivity of Juror Identification and Juror Questionnaires: The council adopted a new standard of judicial administration to ensure gender inclusivity in juror identification and juror questionnaires per Assembly Bill 1899 (2024). The council also approved changes to existing rules of court, forms, and standards to ensure language directed to jurors is gender inclusive. Report on Pretrial Programs: The council received the latest report on court pretrial programs and practices that promote safe, efficient, fair, and timely pretrial release of individuals booked into jail. The report includes data on bookings, release types, assessments conducted, the use of monitoring and supportive services, and case closure outcomes. The complete meeting agenda and council reports are posted to the California Courts Meeting Information Center—an archived webcast of today’s meeting will be posted to the center as soon as it is available. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/judicial-council-consider-mandatory-reporting-civil-arrests-court-facilities Judicial Council to Consider Mandatory Reporting of Civil Arrests in Court FacilitiesCorren, Blaine Fri, 04/17/2026 - 15:57 News Release VIA WEB CONFERENCE—Judicial Council members will consider a new rule at their April 24 business meeting that would require courts to report civil arrests—such as those related to federal immigration enforcement actions—that happen in superior court facilities. The proposed rule aims to help the judicial branch better understand the impacts civil arrests in court facilities have on courts and access to justice, as well as assist the branch in responding to court or community concerns. Other Items on Council Meeting Agenda: Report on Pretrial Programs: The council will consider the latest report on court pretrial programs and practices that promote safe, efficient, fair, and timely pretrial release of individuals booked into jail. The report includes data on bookings, release types, assessments conducted, the use of monitoring and supportive services, and case closure outcomes. Gender Inclusivity of Juror Identification and Juror Questionnaires: The council will consider adopting a new standard of judicial administration to ensure gender inclusivity in juror identification and juror questionnaires per Assembly Bill 1899 (2024). The proposal also recommends changes to existing rules of court, forms, and standards that currently use language directed to jurors that is not gender inclusive. Appointment of Counsel in Capital Cases: The council will receive a report from its 2025 Proposition 66 Counsel Working Group, which examined the appointment of counsel for petitioners in capital habeas corpus proceedings in both the superior courts and the Courts of Appeal. The report will summarize information the working group received from speakers with experience in capital habeas corpus proceedings and provide suggestions that judicial branch entities may consider in their efforts to recruit and appoint counsel for petitioners in such proceedings. California Access to Justice Commission: The council will hear a presentation from the California Access to Justice Commission, which works with courts, the bar, and justice system stakeholders to expand access to justice through legal services, self-help centers, navigators and small claims advisors, language assistance, libraries, and other community agencies and services. The complete council meeting agenda and council reports are posted to the California Courts Meeting Information Center. A link to a live webcast of the meeting will be on the California Courts website on the day of the meeting. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/justice-kelli-evans-and-justice-stacy-boulware-eurie-share-perspectives-diversity-courts Justice Kelli Evans and Justice Stacy Boulware Eurie Share Perspectives on Diversity in the CourtsKaren.Datangel Wed, 03/25/2026 - 14:58 Feature Justice Kelli Evans and Justice Stacy Boulware Eurie began their journeys in law as students at UC Davis at similar times, but neither expected their rise to the bench in California's appellate courts, as they first recounted in a conversation with each other during the Black History Month 2026 Closing Ceremony at the Judicial Council on Feb. 25. "As an attorney, I hoped and thought that one day I would eventually like to become a judge, so when I got appointed to the Alameda County court trial bench, I thought I had made it...and I would have happily retired there," said Justice Evans, associate justice of the California Supreme Court. "It was a surprise when I got the call from the governor saying he wanted to elevate me to the California Supreme Court." "While in law school, I dreamt of being a trial judge and when I was appointed in 2007 [to the Sacramento Superior Court], it was literally a dream come true," said Justice Stacy Boulware Eurie, associate justice of the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. "There's no way I could have anticipated or predicted the current seat I hold." The two justices shared the stage to discuss insights on diversity and inclusion in the courts, access to justice, the roles of judicial officers and court staff, and other topics. Following are highlights from their conversation. On the role of jurists in honoring diversity and inclusion Justice Evans: When I think about inclusion in particular, I think what it means is making sure people feel seen and are seen, feel heard and are heard, have a shot at opportunities, and in the court system, that they feel like it really works for them. Individual judges can do things in their courtrooms that embody these values. From the bench, you can treat all litigants with respect, make sure that you're implementing procedural justice in your courtroom. You can make sure you're using inclusive and accessible language. You can make sure you're explaining your decisions clearly, particularly to the person on the losing side of the decision. You can do things at a leadership level, like advocate for policies that help promote diversity and inclusion. Another thing judges and individuals can do is community outreach and engagement. The more that our communities understand about the justice business, the better it is for our court system and the more likely we are to have diverse and inclusive court systems. If we help everyone to understand they have a stake in it, they have an opportunity to participate in a system that can and should work for everyone. Justice Boulware Eurie: We're all familiar with systemic opportunities and/or barriers for diversity and inclusion, but I also think there's an individual level of opportunity and obligation to see who's at that proverbial table. No entity or structure is perfect but I do think our branch in particular is a mirror to society. The folks that come in through courthouse doors, those folks who support the work of the trial courts, Courts of Appeal, and the Supreme Court reflect and should reflect California's citizenry. On the importance of diversity of perspectives and experiences in courts Justice Evans: In the California Supreme Court, we have seven justices who are responsible for making decisions that impact all 40 million of us in California. When you have people at that table who have diverse experiences like people who have been defense attorneys, have represented civil rights litigants, worked with law enforcement their whole lives, been subjects of racial profiling, have family members who have been incarcerated, or have been career prosecutors, that's a very rich discussion and it brings voices to the table that have long been missing. When I talk about diversity, I'm not just talking about race, gender, or sexual orientation - I'm talking about life experience, geography, practice areas, income, all sorts of things. I think it's important in the trial courts if not more important at the appellate court levels. The more people with nuanced perspectives who are part of a conversation, we'll have fewer blind spot errors, and we'll have a better understanding of potential impacts on various communities. Justice Boulware Eurie: When we talk about an impartial court and fair and balanced justice, I think some of that comes from diversity of thought, not just traditional values or experiences. Are there voices that are ensuring a check on the system and as drivers of procedural justice, that it's not just one voice being heard? Is there space for different perspectives and values on how the law is interpreted? I think it looks different in a Court of Appeal or Supreme Court because it's not a single individual judge making all the decisions in a courtroom. In the trial court, those different [perspectives can come from] roles of the prosecutor or public defender, or parents' counsel, minor's counsel, and county counsel. I'm pretty proud of California's courts because I think our branch is embracing the opportunities we're talking about. I thought about language and diversity of perspectives. In juvenile court, when we're dealing with children who are removed from their homes - particularly Black families and communities - we may hear "Hey, that's my cousin." You might later figure out "That's my play cousin" and having a bench officer who understands community relationships and ties that exist beyond blood helps to inform the decision-making in about what's in the best interest of the child. This is just one example of a type of diversity of experience and the opportunity for more informed decision making when you are hearing from and learning about different experiences. On court staff Justice Evans: Our clerks are procedural guardians. Our research attorneys carry an enormously important load as first line filters for the judges and justices for what's coming in and they often go through incredibly voluminous records. There are other court staff like interpreters, reporters, and self-help attorneys. There are court administrators who are doing work that make our courts accessible to the public. Our librarians are facilitating all of our access to material that we need to do our jobs. We've got court security personnel that are protecting our litigants and jurors. Sometimes this work is done under immense time pressure and public scrutiny. We're in a system full of unsung heroes. People know about judges, but people also need to know about the essential roles in our justice system that make it possible to seek and obtain justice. I also know that the more people learn about these roles - young people in particular - the more they're interested in our work. Young people may not be interested in becoming a lawyer or a judge, but would be really interested in one of these other roles. So the more we can share that information, the better. Justice Boulware Eurie: The one role I want to highlight is IT (Information Technology). In the Sacramento Superior Court in the period during COVID, we were spreading jurors out in different courtrooms and utilizing Zoom for them to hear and participate in selection. We had one particular IT member who was running from courtroom to courtroom, standing in the back -- not just to make sure the Zoom and speakers were working, but to make sure we could all be heard clearly. He was trying to stand in the shoes of the user, hearing what was happening in that courtroom or a different courtroom so there was meaningful participation. We know remote access is something the branch is very committed to and is super important. Advice for law students and aspiring lawyers Justice Boulware Eurie: Keep an open mind. I think a lot of people attend law school and go in with this vision of what it is that they want to do and just like undergrad, it's an opportunity for exploration. There will be an opportunity to learn so many substantive areas that you may not have been familiar with. As it relates to this conversation [around diversity and inclusion], I think of the growing importance of environmental law and looking at the demographics of law schools and who participates in those programs -- often I don't see people of color. Look not only where you can participate, but who can you bring along? What other spaces, clinicals, programs, and internships might you and your peers participate in? Is it always the same folks raising their hands? Is there a way you can nudge a colleague or peer to join you in a lunchtime conversation with a professor on a topic that you might otherwise think is dry as sand? Challenge yourself by learning something new in terms of perspective, life background, and the law. Justice Evans: Do what interests you. It might not be what everyone else is doing. Find people that you think are doing things that are interesting and exciting, and reach out to them and learn more. Try lots of different things and stay flexible. There's lot of different ways to be happy in any career but especially as a lawyer. Watch Justice Evans and Justice Boulware Eurie's full conversation. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/courts-using-ai-and-cybersecurity-advances-improve-access-justice Courts Using AI and Cybersecurity Advances to Improve Access to JusticeMartin.Novitski Fri, 03/20/2026 - 12:40 Feature SAN FRANCISCO—A recent statewide technology summit convened hundreds of court professionals from around the state to talk about cybersecurity and how using artificial intelligence (AI) data can improve efficiency and benefit court users. The March 11 summit in San Francisco was the fifth of its kind hosted by the Judicial Council to bring courts together to share information and best practices on new technologies. How Advances in Artificial Intelligence Can Benefit Court Users Leaders from courts in San Diego, Orange, and Monterey counties led breakout sessions with topics ranging from understanding how AI can assist with translation and document workflows to discussions about maintaining guardrails to protect user data. In one breakout room, Judge Michael S. Groch from the San Diego Superior Court and Court Information Officer Brett Howard of the Orange Superior Court educated judicial officers and court executives on the use of AI. That session included an overview of Thomson Reuters CoCounsel, which can be used to improve judicial workflow, as well as demonstrated examples of what types of court work are safe to use with current generative AI technology. In her remarks to summit participants, California Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero acknowledged that AI can benefit court users. “Whatever new needs and opportunities will arise, I’m confident we will remain committed to innovation, to collaboration, and to aligning technology with our judicial branch goals,” she said, emphasizing the importance of collaboration throughout the constantly evolving landscape of technology. “And with all of you together, we will continue to shape the future for the courts, ensuring that technology serves as a bridge to justice.” Midnote speaker, Kevin Roose, Technology Columnist for The New York Times, invited attendees to look ahead as he highlighted the rapid acceleration of AI, noting that emerging tools are making “everyone a programmer.” He also considered what comes next after Artificial Generative Intelligence (AGI), including AI constitutions, defining intent for AI agents, and navigating a future with vast numbers of highly capable machine intelligences. Cybersecurity and the Courts A second set of breakout sessions focused on the growing need for cybersecurity enhancements in court operations. Speakers from Orange, Mono, and Riverside counties, as well as the Fifth Appellate District, emphasized preemptive measures and preparation as key factors in bolstering cybersecurity to protect court users. For example, Mono Superior Court Executive Officer Lester Perpall and Riverside Superior Court Deputy Chief of Information Technology Tim Cool spoke to fellow court staff about the importance of diligence and follow-through to improving cybersecurity in the courts. “Failures don’t happen because we don’t care,” Perpall warned. “Most failures happen because we confuse appearance with execution.” In addition, Adam Dodge, attorney and founder of EndTAB (End Technology-Enabled Abuse), served as the keynote speaker of the event. He warned that new technology is actively being used internationally to defraud others in real time. “We’re putting really powerful tools in the hands of people who could never access this level of sophistication before,” he stated as he demonstrated how AI deepfakes can be used to create increasingly realistic scams using technology that is evolving every day. Retired California Supreme Court Justice Recognizes Technology Pioneers Former California Supreme Court Justice Ming Chin presented the 2026 Justice Chin Technology Innovation Award to the Los Angeles Superior Court for its CourtHelp program, an AI-powered chatbot that helps web users navigate their court’s website. The award recognizes programs and projects that have increased access to justice through new technology. This is the second award of its kind, with the first one given to Alameda Superior Court at the 2023 Technology Summit. “It gives me great relief to find all of you still interested and progressing in the area of IT,” Justice Chin remarked as he closed the ceremony. “I encourage you to continue to do that, take it back to your courts, get more people involved and interested in IT.” Los Angeles Superior Court was honored with the Justice Ming Chin Technology Innovation Award for their CourtHelp program, a virtual assistant designed to help court users navigate the court’s website. (left to right) Matt Frederick, Technology Creative Director; Christopher Choi, Deputy Court Information Officer; Romulo Reyes, Deputy Court Information Officer; Raz Salehynia, Software Engineer Manager; Honorable Sergio C. Tapia II, Presiding Judge; Justice Ming W. Chin, Supreme Court Justice (ret.); David Slayton, Court Executive Officer/Clerk of Court; Mike Baliel, Court Information Officer; Jordan Aiken, Senior IT Manager- Infrastructure; and Luis Olachea, Deputy Court Information Officer. https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/council-approves-funding-technology-projects-improve-services-public Council Approves Funding for Technology Projects to Improve Services for the PublicCorren, Blaine Fri, 02/20/2026 - 10:58 News Release SAN FRANCISCO—The Judicial Council at its Feb. 20 meeting approved funding for the Superior Court of Los Angeles County to continue hosting a shared solution that sends automated text message notifications—such as hearing reminders—to court users in nine participating courts. This technology funding is part of a state modernization grant program managed by the council that helps courts improve services to the public. “We know that every single court in our state needs additional technology funding—the applications far exceed the available funding,” said Judge Maria Hernandez, chair of the council’s Technology Committee. “We want you to understand the critical need in creating these opportunities and how our courts are able to expand access to justice through these technology initiatives.” The council also heard about how other California courts use the funding to improve operations and expand access: Digitizing Documents: Reduces printing and storage costs, improves data security, and enhances efficiency through e-filing, faster case processing, and streamlined public access requests   Audio/Video Upgrades: Enhances remote participation in court proceedings through audio and video upgrades, and provides technologies for website chatbots and virtual assistants that allow staff to assist the public via live video and secure document sharing   Cyber/Information Security: Protects case files, evidence, and confidential information, as well as preventing disruptions to court operations and proceedings Watch archived webcast of this portion of the meeting Other Items on Council Meeting Agenda: Report Shows Strong Support for Remote Court Proceedings: The council received a report showing that litigants and court staff who took part in remote appearances in civil and criminal proceedings had an overwhelmingly positive experience. Based on user responses between September 1, 2024, and August 31, 2025, approximately 90% of court users and 98% of court staff reported a positive experience. The council also heard firsthand from San Diego County Judge Lisa Rodriguez, Dependency Legal Services Policy Director/Lead Attorney Julia Hanagan, and other council members on their experiences with remote proceedings and the benefits this option provides court users and staff. Watch archived webcast of this portion of the meeting Presentation From the Department of Finance: The council received an update from the California Department of Finance (DOF) on the state's current fiscal situation and how the judicial branch budget is developed. The DOF discussed how personal income taxes, capital gains, and changes to federal funding causes volatility in the state’s revenues. Due to these variables, the DOF puts a priority on long-term fiscal resilience and adequate reserves. Despite improving economic signals and revenues, the DOF predicts a modest budget shortfall for the next budget cycle due to previous deficits and ongoing debt obligations. Watch archived webcast of this portion of the meeting Education for Judges and Court Staff: The council approved its next two-year education plan for developing and delivering education to justices, judges, and court staff to help them maintain high standards of professionalism, ethics, and performance for the benefit of the public. The plan includes on-demand videos, online courses, webinars, podcasts, and publications, as well as live interactive programs and courses offered both in person and remotely. Presenters included information and examples of resources in the areas of environmental law, domestic violence, and new judge education. Watch archived webcast of this portion of the meeting Judicial Council Member to Retire: With more 30 years of trial court experience, Darrel Parker, court executive officer for the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County, will retire effective Feb. 27. Parker served as an advisory member of the council as chair of its Court Executives Advisory Committee. He has also served on many other council advisory bodies and curriculum committees during his judicial branch career. Judicial Council of California 100th Anniversary Video: The conclusion of the business meeting featured a preview of a video produced to highlight the council’s creation in 1926 and its role in improving the statewide administration of justice. Once finalized, the council will post the video to its 100th anniversary website, which also features bios of previous Chief Justices and council administrative directors, as well as a timeline of actions taken or supported by the council that helped transform the court user-experience in California over the last 100 years. Watch archived webcast of this portion of the meeting The complete meeting agenda and council reports are posted to the California Courts Meeting Information Center—an archived webcast of today’s meeting will be posted to the center as soon as it is available.