Judges and Judiciary,
Ethics/Professional Responsibility,
State Bar & Bar Associations
Sep. 20, 2019
Bill would require implicit bias training for judges and lawyers
AB 242 recognizes that many judges and lawyers have implicit negative biases against minority groups including. It would authorize the Judicial Council to develop training and require attorneys to complete training on implicit bias.
Elana R. Levine
Trial Attorney
AlderLaw, P.C.
She is a graduate of the University of California at Santa Barbara and Southwestern Law School. Licensed since 2004, Levine has devoted her practice to employment and consumer law, including individual, representative and class litigation in state and federal courts.
I recently heard an all too common story about a fellow female litigator who was denied a trial continuance due to the birth of her baby. The judge (a man) found that there was no "medical necessity" for the continuance. I don't know this judge's background, but I don't know of too many judges who are also medical doctors. Would a male litigator be treated in the same manner if he had just had major abdominal surgery? Does a woman really need to fully explain the full...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In