Judges Reject Bid to Add Ethics Code Item on Gay Bias : Judiciary: Sixty-four percent vote down a proposal that would prohibit their membership in organizations that discriminate against homosexuals.

By MAURA DOLAN

Nov. 23, 1993 12 AM PT

TIMES LEGAL AFFAIRS WRITER

SAN FRANCISCO — California judges have rejected a requirement that would have prohibited them from joining groups that discriminate against gays, according to a secret ballot poll made public Monday.

Sixty-four percent of the 1,173 judges who responded to a ballot voted against adding sexual orientation to a code of conduct that prohibits membership in organizations that discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, gender and religion.

The change would have prohibited judges from sitting on councils for the Boy Scouts of America or joining any group that banned gays and lesbians. The California Judges Assn., a voluntary professional group of most of the state’s trial and appellate judges, conducted the vote.

“Issues involving sexual orientation are being debated in Congress and are presently pending in our courts,” said San Diego Municipal Judge E. Mac Amos Jr., president of the California Judges Assn. “Many judges are concerned that the adoption of the amendment at this time might have a negative impact upon the public’s perception of the judiciary’s ability to deal with these issues in a fair and unbiased manner.”

But Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Keith Wisot, who is gay, said many judges are prejudiced against gays and lesbians.

“I am not surprised because I know the mental attitudes of too many of my colleagues,” Wisot said, “and although I can respect differences, I do not respect ignorance and discrimination like this. It is too often the result of not being well informed.”

In a statement, the judges association said the rejection of the proposed amendment to the California Code of Judicial Conduct “does not affect the standards which insure fairness in judicial proceedings.”

Rather, the group said, the vote reflects a concern that additional restrictions should not be placed on judges’ private conduct while courts resolve gay discrimination cases.

The code prohibits judges from discriminating against gays in judicial proceedings and requires them to prevent lawyers and court staff from engaging in such bias in the courtroom.

Jon Davidson, senior staff council of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, said supporters of the code amendment will try to resurrect it in the future. Judges who violate the code of conduct can be disciplined.

“It is profoundly disappointing that the judges sitting in California refuse to personally abide by principles of equality of all persons,” Davidson said. “I will predict this will not be the last attempt to have the change come about.”